Stephan Bosch:
> Hi Wietse,
>
>
> Op 06/11/2018 om 00:36 schreef Wietse Venema:
> > Stephan Bosch:
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> Is there a reason why Postfix omits quoting the localpart (when that
> >> would normally be necessary according to RFC 5321) of sender and
> >> recipient addresses passed to a policy delegation service (in this case
> >> Dovecot quota-status)?
> > What you see is the unquoted form which is what Postfix uses
> > everywhere internally. Using the RFC 532X syntax would make it
> > way too easy to circumvent address-based features.
> >
> > In the previous year time I have converted most table lookups to
> > use canonical quoted form first, then try the unquoted form if it
> > is different, for backwards compatibility safety.
> >
> > In the policy protocol there is no way to use multiple forms,
> > so changing from unquoted to quopted forms would have to be a
> > compatibility-breaking change.
>
> OK, good to know. I'll adjust Dovecot accordingly then.
>
> Do you have some special rules to parse this reliably? The strategy I am
> currently testing splits the address on the last '@' and rejects the
> result when the obtained localpart and domain cannot be used to compose
> a valid (quoted) RFC5321 address.
Postfix does not support domain-less addresses, so the right-most
@ indicates the end of the localpart. For quoting a localpart,
Postfix uses RFC 821 or 822 syntax: if a localpart must be quoted,
it double-quotes the entire localpart, and it prepends a backslash
to controls and to backslash itself.
Wietse
