Dumplicated 'To' fields

Dumplicated 'To' fields

[Xavier Maillard]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 494 bytes --]

Hi,

I've recently received what I have seen as a weird mail. In fact the
headers contained two 'To' fields in it. As I am curious on the purpose
of such a method, I've tried by myself using Gnus and it worked.

Now I am asking if this is really authorized by any RFC and if we
shouldn't disable such a feature in case it is not.

Any pointers ?

zeDek
-- 
http://www.gnusfr.org -- French Gnus user site

Anti-war disclaimer:
	"Bombing for peace is like fucking for virginity"

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 188 bytes --]

Re: Dumplicated 'To' fields

[Simon Josefsson]

Xavier Maillard <zedek@gnu-rox.org> writes:

> Hi,
>
> I've recently received what I have seen as a weird mail. In fact the
> headers contained two 'To' fields in it. As I am curious on the purpose
> of such a method, I've tried by myself using Gnus and it worked.

It is valid, so it should work.

> Now I am asking if this is really authorized by any RFC and if we
> shouldn't disable such a feature in case it is not.

Gnus didn't generate the situation, did it?  So if the user typed the
headers manually, I think it is better to do what she said.  See RFC
(2)822.

Re: Dumplicated 'To' fields

[Jesper Harder]

Simon Josefsson <jas@extundo.com> writes:

> Xavier Maillard <zedek@gnu-rox.org> writes:
>
>> I've recently received what I have seen as a weird mail. In fact the
>> headers contained two 'To' fields in it. As I am curious on the purpose
>> of such a method, I've tried by myself using Gnus and it worked.
>
> It is valid, so it should work.

Nope, multiple To fields are not allowed, cf. the table in RFC 2822,
Section 3.6.

Re: Dumplicated 'To' fields

[Simon Josefsson]

Jesper Harder <harder@myrealbox.com> writes:

> Simon Josefsson <jas@extundo.com> writes:
>
>> Xavier Maillard <zedek@gnu-rox.org> writes:
>>
>>> I've recently received what I have seen as a weird mail. In fact the
>>> headers contained two 'To' fields in it. As I am curious on the purpose
>>> of such a method, I've tried by myself using Gnus and it worked.
>>
>> It is valid, so it should work.
>
> Nope, multiple To fields are not allowed, cf. the table in RFC 2822,
> Section 3.6.

RFC 2822 is just a PS, so 822 behavior is still valid, I believe.  See
RFC 2822 4.5 for the obs-to field definition, which is identical to
the to field definition, but can occur several times.

Re: Dumplicated 'To' fields

[Jesper Harder]

Simon Josefsson <jas@extundo.com> writes:

> Jesper Harder <harder@myrealbox.com> writes:
>
>> Simon Josefsson <jas@extundo.com> writes:
>
>>> It is valid, so it should work.
>>
>> Nope, multiple To fields are not allowed, cf. the table in RFC 2822,
>> Section 3.6.
>
> See RFC 2822 4.5 for the obs-to field definition, which is identical
> to the to field definition, but can occur several times.

Ah, yes you're right -- it's obsolete, but clients should still be
able to interpret it.

Re: Dumplicated 'To' fields

[Simon Josefsson]

Jesper Harder <harder@myrealbox.com> writes:

> Simon Josefsson <jas@extundo.com> writes:
>
>> Jesper Harder <harder@myrealbox.com> writes:
>>
>>> Simon Josefsson <jas@extundo.com> writes:
>>
>>>> It is valid, so it should work.
>>>
>>> Nope, multiple To fields are not allowed, cf. the table in RFC 2822,
>>> Section 3.6.
>>
>> See RFC 2822 4.5 for the obs-to field definition, which is identical
>> to the to field definition, but can occur several times.
>
> Ah, yes you're right -- it's obsolete, but clients should still be
> able to interpret it.

Perhaps Gnus could warn if the user types multiple To: lines though?
OTOH, minibuffer queries are pure evil, so the warning must be
non-obtrusive if it is present at all.  Perhaps coloring the second To
red and having a balloon help with information would work; or some
tty-friendlier variation of the same idea.

Perhaps other message.el warnings could be recast like this too.  The
non-legible character set question would be really nice to get rid of
IMHO.  Just highlight the illegible text in the message buffer, and
when the user sends the message, really do send it.

Re: Dumplicated 'To' fields

[Xavier Maillard]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1973 bytes --]

On 3 jun 2003, Simon Josefsson outgrape:

>  Jesper Harder <harder@myrealbox.com> writes:
>  
> >  Simon Josefsson <jas@extundo.com> writes:
> >  
> > >  Jesper Harder <harder@myrealbox.com> writes:
> > >  
> > > >  Simon Josefsson <jas@extundo.com> writes:
> > >  
> > > > >  It is valid, so it should work.
> > > >  
> > > >  Nope, multiple To fields are not allowed, cf. the table in RFC
> > > >  2822, Section 3.6.
> > >  
> > >  See RFC 2822 4.5 for the obs-to field definition, which is
> > >  identical to the to field definition, but can occur several
> > >  times.
> >  
> >  Ah, yes you're right -- it's obsolete, but clients should still be
> >  able to interpret it.
>  
>  Perhaps Gnus could warn if the user types multiple To: lines though?

Not a too bad idea. In fact I don't really know why user can enter 2 or
more 'To' fields. That doesn't sound natural to me.

>  OTOH, minibuffer queries are pure evil, so the warning must be
>  non-obtrusive if it is present at all.  Perhaps coloring the second
>  To red and having a balloon help with information would work; or some
>  tty-friendlier variation of the same idea.

Seems good.
  
>  Perhaps other message.el warnings could be recast like this too.  The
>  non-legible character set question would be really nice to get rid of
>  IMHO.  Just highlight the illegible text in the message buffer, and
>  when the user sends the message, really do send it.

That's an idea we can work on and maybe generalize to all the same
situation. I vote for.

Thanx for all your enlightenments and your quick and clear answers
guys. Maybe some day I will read the mail dedicated RFCs. BTW, which
RFCs are the most important ? I mean which one should be read and known
for somebody wnating to hack a little more into the Gnus core ?

zeDek
-- 
http://www.gnusfr.org -- French Gnus user site

Anti-war disclaimer:
	"Bombing for peace is like fucking for virginity"

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 188 bytes --]