Viktor Dukhovni via Postfix-users:
> On Mon, Dec 02, 2024 at 08:27:16AM -0500, Wietse Venema via Postfix-users
> wrote:
> > Michael Tokarev via Postfix-users:
> > > so now it's the bounce which is *also* marked as requiring SMTPUTF8.
> > > I'm not sure this is right or not, - the bounce itself hopefully should
> > > not include non-7bit headers in this case.
> >
> > Bounces contain the original message header, which required SMTPUTF8
> > UTF8 text, therefore the returned message requires SMTPUTF8.
>
> My strong recommendation/preference in such cases would be for bounces
> to not return the original message as an attachment, but rather return
> just the original top-level headers (text/message-rfc822-headers), which
> being just text (not a compound MIME object) is easily QP or base64
> encoded. [ The "message/global" design error should be avoided at all
> costs. ]
I'm reconsidering how/when to enforce SMTPUTF8 (enforce means return
an SMTPUTF8 message as undeliverable when the next hop does not
announce SMTPUTF8 support).
There is already code in the SMTP client that avoids SMTPUTF8
enforcement when no sender, no headers, and none of the recipients
in a specific delivery request contain 8bit information.
Other MTAs can cheat because they don't parse MIME and thus don't
detect all UTF8 headers.
Stripping the body is one way to avoid this mess.
Wietse
_______________________________________________
Postfix-users mailing list -- postfix-users@postfix.org
To unsubscribe send an email to postfix-users-le...@postfix.org
