[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Unquoted "@" in From still in the wild?
- To: ietf-822@xxxxxxx
- Subject: Unquoted "@" in From still in the wild?
- From: "Mikel Lindsaar" <raasdnil@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 2 Dec 2007 20:58:39 +1100
- Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:mime-version:content-type; bh=16TJnh0Gk4AdCpnM60DvqkMBL8VjkvLUHhzJcDd9128=; b=oV61IHm8UUW7l5ScwwpwUfk3n3u95jl6l0gamU08sqKthwdCIokeFA6K4wMqJU1E5sAxEsCX2VsOezLhMKiD6SObYvTYKcG3VKU/6EZmbBY5uHWjU4FfPeKhBaTQnqkxwfgkIaGa6VoYu5Ghb20PPCIsOJ9VjzOSbF07VQ0dZZ8=
- Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:mime-version:content-type; b=PDk9p9CHrsF028N3jxAoO15LUgnudJCLgmydz875OfDN2CE1gZR88Oobf9XoPuwoZCXxvAX6edvlwVoSlKRTr6Lzmx0eEV9Yv6wS1dTXiuDatwDUiwR3NIPg+u6fvT8lKARBLKHyBeNT7Vhpp8zs22KMGyFPj1BMDLT1UockfiE=
- List-archive: <http://www.imc.org/ietf-822/mail-archive/>
- List-id: <ietf-822.imc.org>
- List-unsubscribe: <mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org?body=unsubscribe>
- Sender: owner-ietf-822@xxxxxxxxxxxx
I am fixing up the TMail mail library for Ruby. As part of this, I am incorporating the patches the Ruby on Rails guys have done to the library for their implementation. But I am checking each one :)
There is a test case for an unquoted @ char in the from line. Their handling was to whack "@" into the ATOM_CHARS definition. Per RFC 2822 3.2.4 this is not a valid character for the ATOM set.
The reason they put this in is to handle a bug in Apple Mail.app which was not quoting the From field correctly if it contained a @ symbol. This has been fixed in subsequent revisions of
Mail.app. The problem is, that putting @ into ATOM_CHARS obviously breaks other test cases in the TMail library.
My question is 2 fold:
1) Removing @ is the obvious simple solution to return to the RFC2822 spec as Apple have fixed Mail.app, but is this "bug" implemented elsewhere the list members know of? Should I spend the time to handle it in this edge case in the library? It looks like a bit of a hack to change the parser to allow this and I don't want to go there if I don't _have_ to...
2) Is @ actually allowed in the description area of the From field (ie: From: mikel@me <mikel@xxxxxx
> ) from a revision to the RFC that I am unaware of?
Thanks in advance.