On Wed, Sep 17, 2025 at 02:27:15PM +0200, Arrigo Triulzi via mailop wrote:
> On 17 Sep 2025, at 11:38, Bastian Blank via mailop <mailop@mailop.org> wrote:
> > On Wed, Sep 17, 2025 at 08:55:31AM +0200, Arrigo Triulzi via mailop wrote:
> >> This is because they put a newline between the header ID and the header,
> >> e.g.
> >> Message-ID:
> >> CommentMentionWord-d5f9b97d-c66e-491a-a701-34847b35ab80-a28d843e-d597-464e-a0cf-23b0c01eadc9-r0-SendEmail-UpdateActivity-rh_neu-aid_6610d7df-63e5-46ef-bd0c-448e18558d2b@odspnotify
> > Nope. Let's review the definition for message-id from RFC 5322:
> > message-id = "Message-ID:" msg-id CRLF
> > msg-id = [CFWS] "<" id-left "@" id-right ">" [CFWS]
> > Aka it must start with a "<" and end with a ">". But it is no e-mail
> > address.
> Yes, that too… the CRLF is just the icing on the cake.
No, CRLF is no problem, this header starts with CFWS, so folding is
allowed.
CFWS = (1*([FWS] comment) [FWS]) / FWS
FWS = ([*WSP CRLF] 1*WSP)
This could be a properly folded header, you just don't show the leading
whitespace.
If there is really no whitespace, then "CommentMentionWord" would be the
start of the body. And many software would just insert the empty line
before the body and never display it this way.
Bastian
--
Immortality consists largely of boredom.
-- Zefrem Cochrane, "Metamorphosis", stardate 3219.8
_______________________________________________
mailop mailing list
mailop@mailop.org
https://list.mailop.org/listinfo/mailop
