content_filter post processing question
in [Postfix]
|
Prev: back-scatter
Next: adding header to outgoing mail
From: Gary Smith on 11 May 2010 21:45 > > When it comes to envelope, specifically "mail from:" and "rcpt > > to:", my understanding is that these will never have comments in > > them and be just plain email addresses john(a)example.com, > > bounce(a)jack@bounce(a)example.com, etc, but never "jack" <jack(a)example.com> > > (or <jack(a)example.com> (i.e. the <> ). In the sample python > > server, it passes in mailfrom and rcptto's and I'm just trying to > > get a feel for the format to expect those addresses in. > > That depends on how Postfix is configured. > > Remember, Postfix passes the RCPT TO and MAIL FROM commands to the > filter as received. By default, Postfix allows non-standard forms > (such as your examples). If this is a problem then you will need > to configure "strict_rfc821_envelopes = yes" in main.cf. > Wietse, I see what you are saying. What are the potential risks of losing legitimate email turning it on? Or, better question WWWD? I have yet to see a non-conformer in the saved envelopers that we have, so I suspect that most modern MTA's are should conform. Gary-
From: Wietse Venema on 11 May 2010 22:15 Gary Smith: > > > > When it comes to envelope, specifically "mail from:" and "rcpt > > > to:", my understanding is that these will never have comments in > > > them and be just plain email addresses john(a)example.com, > > > bounce(a)jack@bounce(a)example.com, etc, but never "jack" <jack(a)example.com> > > > (or <jack(a)example.com> (i.e. the <> ). In the sample python > > > server, it passes in mailfrom and rcptto's and I'm just trying to > > > get a feel for the format to expect those addresses in. > > > > That depends on how Postfix is configured. > > > > Remember, Postfix passes the RCPT TO and MAIL FROM commands to the > > filter as received. By default, Postfix allows non-standard forms > > (such as your examples). If this is a problem then you will need > > to configure "strict_rfc821_envelopes = yes" in main.cf. > > > > Wietse, I see what you are saying. What are the potential risks > of losing legitimate email turning it on? Or, better question > WWWD? I have yet to see a non-conformer in the saved envelopers > that we have, so I suspect that most modern MTA's are should > conform. If you are talking only to MTAs then the odds of false rejects are small. BTW Postfix does not log MAIL FROM/RCPT commands. Postfix logs the addresses that it pulls out from the MAIL FROM/RCPT commands. Wietse
From: Gary Smith on 12 May 2010 09:45 > > > That depends on how Postfix is configured. > > > > > > Remember, Postfix passes the RCPT TO and MAIL FROM commands to the > > > filter as received. By default, Postfix allows non-standard forms > > > (such as your examples). If this is a problem then you will need > > > to configure "strict_rfc821_envelopes = yes" in main.cf. > > > Wietse, One last question on the subject for now. I found while parsing the bugtrack for python that some users were having issues with email addresses that were formatted as 'first last <@domain.tld,first(a)example.com>' My understanding is that regardless of the comment contents inside of the <> there can be only (1) @ symbol and that anything else is violating RFC. Can you confirm? Gary-
From: Wietse Venema on 12 May 2010 10:29 Gary Smith: > > > > That depends on how Postfix is configured. > > > > > > > > Remember, Postfix passes the RCPT TO and MAIL FROM commands to the > > > > filter as received. By default, Postfix allows non-standard forms > > > > (such as your examples). If this is a problem then you will need > > > > to configure "strict_rfc821_envelopes = yes" in main.cf. > > > > > > Wietse, > > One last question on the subject for now. I found while parsing the bugtr >-ack for python that some users were having issues with email addresses that >-were formatted as 'first last <@domain.tld,first(a)example.com>' My understan >-ding is that regardless of the comment contents inside of the <> there can b >-e only (1) @ symbol and that anything else is violating RFC. Can you confir >-m The SMTP protocol is not a trade secret. The definition is publically available from the IETF website. Wietse
From: Gary Smith on 12 May 2010 10:37
> The SMTP protocol is not a trade secret. The definition is publically > available from the IETF website. You make it hard to try to be lazy ;). I'll look into the RFC. In the background I will probably just enforce the strict_rfc821_envelopes policy. |