From: Wietse Venema (wietseporcupine.org)
Date: Thu Jan 12 2006 - 18:10:19 CST

• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

Andrzej Adam Filip:
> >>We must *clearly* separate two situations:
> >>a) MTA acts as relay to another MTA/system
> >>According to RFC2821 case of local-part *MUST BE* preserved
> >>b) MTA conducts "final delivery"
> >>MTA *MAY* treat local-part as case insensitive.
> >>
> >>I think most of out disagreement has raised from mixing "a" and "b"
> >>situations. Some people *want to* use case sensitive local-parts.
> >>
> >>Sendmail *CAN* treat local parts in case sensitive but I think it is a bad
> >>recommendation on *this* mail list :-)
> >>http://www.sendmail.org/faq/section4.html#4.17
> >
> > How many table lookups do you propose for an address mapping or
> > access map lookup when a transit MTA handles mail for
> > WiEtSeVeNeMaporcupine.org. 2**12 lookups?
>
> Option 0:
> * case insensitive lookups by defalut (convert to lowercase before lookup)
> * "per domain" option to treat local-part *ONLY* in case sensitive manner
> [ *ONE* lookup only ]
>
> P.S.
> I personally care a little how postfix handles case (in)sensitivity of
> local-part. I merely challenged statement that local-part case insensitivity
> is RFC blessed.

These things are an issue when Postfix matches an address against
a table (like virtual alias maps) and then copies portions from
the matched text to the result.

This is not hard to fix with domain->domain mapping (keep the
unfolded local-part around and use that) or with suffix propagation
(keep the unfolded suffix around and use that).

It's a little trickier with regexp matching, or with map lists that
contain both regexp and non-regexp tables.

It would be nice if this could be fixed but it may have to wait
until Postfix 2.4.

        Wietse

• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]