Re: [Dovecot] dovecot Digest, Vol 91, Issue 18
From: Timo Sirainen tss@iki.fi Subject: Re: [Dovecot] emails getting mangled when dragging from Exchange account to IMAP shared folders
On Wed, 2010-11-03 at 16:18 -0700, Scott Goodwin wrote:
FYI, I got rawlog working and it shows the same break in the raw logs as in the broken headers. Below is a snippet from the rawlog (names and other identifiers redacted). The offending sequence is always in the References headers section, and you can see the line breaks there that show this. So it sounds like this can't be an issue with Dovecot, am I right?
Yeah, sounds like Outlook breaks with huge headers. That's one huge References header you have.
Summarising mail standards (WRT headers)
There is a limit of 4096 characters per line.
If Outlook is breaking at less than that it's a bug.
If the References: line is longer than that then it should have been truncated by the sending MUA - there's no provision for multiline References headers (which are a non-standardised import from Usenet anyway).
On 08/11/2010 12:47, Alan Brown wrote:
From: Timo Sirainen tss@iki.fi Subject: Re: [Dovecot] emails getting mangled when dragging from Exchange account to IMAP shared folders
On Wed, 2010-11-03 at 16:18 -0700, Scott Goodwin wrote:
FYI, I got rawlog working and it shows the same break in the raw logs as in the broken headers. Below is a snippet from the rawlog (names and other identifiers redacted). The offending sequence is always in the References headers section, and you can see the line breaks there that show this. So it sounds like this can't be an issue with Dovecot, am I right?
Yeah, sounds like Outlook breaks with huge headers. That's one huge References header you have.
Summarising mail standards (WRT headers)
There is a limit of 4096 characters per line.
But surely you can fold header records, e.g.
References: foo1@bar.com foo2@bar.com foo3@bar.com
meaning you could have a "References" header record of any length.
If Outlook is breaking at less than that it's a bug.
I take it you mean breaking as in malfunctioning as opposed to breaking as in folding.
If the References: line is longer than that then it should have been truncated by the sending MUA - there's no provision for multiline References headers (which are a non-standardised import from Usenet anyway).
Surely the MUA could just fold the References header record on to multiple lines?
When you say "multiline References headers", do you mean "multiple 'References' header records" or "'References' header records folded on to multiple lines"?
Bill
On 08/11/2010 13:16, William Blunn wrote:
But surely you can fold header records, e.g.
References: foo1@bar.com foo2@bar.com foo3@bar.com
For the avoidance of doubt, the second and third lines of that header record are supposed to have an additional space character at the beginning.
I did type the required space characters, but obviously the creators of the e-mail client software I use don't think it's important to pass such things through without breaking them.
(Whilst I am responsible for choosing that particular e-mail client software, I would venture to suggest that it is hard to find an e-mail client software which is any good.)
Bill
participants (2)
-
Alan Brown
-
William Blunn