On Wed, Jun 05, 2024 at 05:29:16PM +0100, Vsevolod Stakhov via mailop wrote:
> In fact, the original distinction between structured and unstructured
> headers defined in the RFC2047 just makes parsing extremely complicated and
> I personally consider it as an example of a standard being accepted with a
> clear violation of KISS principle for no good reason.
The distinction is essential, because it would be a terrible mistake to,
for example, RFC2047-encode the "mailbox" construct in "From", "To", ...
headers. An RFC2047-ignorant MUA or MTA can still correctly decode the
addresses in those headers without caring about the display name
encoding.
> Unfortunately, SMTPUTF8 makes it even worse as instead of following
> something that works (e.g. punycode) it creates a completely different state
> machine for parsing messages otherwise indistinguishable from generic ASCII
> compatible emails.
It seems to me, that you may not have thought through the issues deeply
enough.
> As Rspamd author, I will not change the existing logic, as it works with
> headers as with black boxes making the following steps: unfold -> rfc2047
> decode -> process specific data.
This, IMNSHO, is not a reasonable stance to take...
Such willful disregard of essential interoperability requirements in
"rspamd" means I will not use it unless you back off from your current
position, and will strongly discourage others (e.g. postfix-users list
readers) from using it. I've heard "rspamd" otherwise has some
appealing features, but this is show-stopper. :-(
--
Viktor.
_______________________________________________
mailop mailing list
mailop@mailop.org
https://list.mailop.org/listinfo/mailop
