From: Charles Lindsey (chl@clerew.man.ac.uk)
Date: Mon May 12 2003 - 05:07:47 CDT
In <p06001009bae1b112d74d@[216.43.25.67]> Pete Resnick <presnick@qualcomm.com> writes:
>On 5/9/03 at 11:46 AM +0000, Charles H. Lindsey wrote:
>>Please report how it arrived.
>Uh, to Charles directly please, folks. Let him summarize for the list.
OK. The first test failed because my local sendmail "mended" the offending
line before sending it out.
The 2nd test, which bypassed sendmail (telnetted directly to port 25 at
landfield.com) produced three replies:
Seth Bredibart From: Charles H.Lindsey <chl@clerew.man.ac.uk>
Simon Josefsson From: "Charles H.Lindsey" <chl@clerew.man.ac.uk>
Graham Drabble From: Charles H. Lindsey <chl@clerew.man.ac.uk>
So it would seem that Kent's mail expander sent it on as received, and
that various user agents did various things to it before displaying it,
none of them particularly harmful.
Did anyone fail to receive it at all? (The subject was "Phrase test 2" and
the Message-ID was <20030509192522.EAA5A59086@rkive.landfield.com>).
And I am interested to hear reports of how the version posted to misc.test
appeared on your sites. The Message-ID for that one was
<HEMBEJ.BM3@clerew.man.ac.uk>.
But even if such headers arrive more-or-less intact and get displayed, the
real test of whether they get parsed correctly is whether user agents that
receive them can extract the mail address from them in order to generate a
reply. So for my next test, I shall include the line
Reply-To: Charles H. Lindsey <chl@clerew.man.ac.uk>
and I shall invite you to reply to it, and I shall see whether it arrives.
-- Charles H. Lindsey ---------At Home, doing my own thing------------------------ Tel: +44 161 436 6131 Fax: +44 161 436 6133 Web: http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/~chl Email: chl@clerew.man.ac.uk Snail: 5 Clerewood Ave, CHEADLE, SK8 3JU, U.K. PGP: 2C15F1A9 Fingerprint: 73 6D C2 51 93 A0 01 E7 65 E8 64 7E 14 A4 AB A5