Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.debian.user > #211706

Re: buster, ekiga.

Show all headers | View raw

On Wed, Jul 24, 2019 at 07:28:11PM +0200, tomas@tuxteam.de wrote:
>On Wed, Jul 24, 2019 at 01:10:49PM -0400, Michael Stone wrote:
>> On Wed, Jul 24, 2019 at 09:29:47AM -0500, David Wright wrote:
>> >However, I would not award +1 to the MUAs that, we are told,
>> >truncate the message, or even just the line, at the first
>> >NUL byte. That could yield a message with a very different sense
>> >from what the sender wrote.
>>
>> And that is what happens when you do something that is out of spec
>> for the protocol--the recipient's behavior is undefined and possibly
>> suboptimal. (A NUL is specifically disallowed per RFC 2822.)
>
>But never forget the Postel Principle. In RFC land, nasal daemons
>are frowned upon ;-)

The reason it was specifically disallowed in RFC2822 is because it broke 
things and gave unexpected results. Just arguing that things should be 
other than they are rarely changes anything. Raw NULs are going to cause 
problems for software that uses NUL-terminated strings. There are ways 
around that, and some of those techiniques have already been implemented 
such that there are standard mechanisms for sending binary data in 
email. Insisting that everybody also handle non-compliant input from 
people who chose not to implement those standards in the past 20+ years, 
and to do so in a particular way, is a waste of time because it simply 
won't happen. The Postel approach is why some MTAs actually accepted the 
message even though it was noncompliant, and on the modern internet it's 
quite likely that many recipients never saw it because their MTA simply 
threw it away. (And many recipients who did see it also saw that it got 
a bump in its spam score because it contained bogus content.) The idea 
that everyone must accept anything is obsolete on the modern internet, 
and while sending noncompliant data out of sheer cussedness may be 
satisfying, it's also likely to leave you shouting to an empty room. A 
better implementation of the robustness principle would have bounced the 
message early so the sender would know that there was a problem with the 
message which would likely interfere with recipients' ability to read
it.

Back to linux.debian.user | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Re: buster, ekiga. peter@easthope.ca - 2019-07-23 17:00 +0200
  Re: buster, ekiga. Greg Wooledge <wooledg@eeg.ccf.org> - 2019-07-23 17:10 +0200
    Re: buster, ekiga. <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2019-07-23 18:40 +0200
    Odd character, was Re: buster, ekiga. David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2019-07-23 21:20 +0200
      Re: Odd character, was Re: buster, ekiga. <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2019-07-23 21:30 +0200
      Re: Odd character, was Re: buster, ekiga. <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2019-07-23 21:40 +0200
        Re: Odd character, was Re: buster, ekiga. Michael Stone <mstone@debian.org> - 2019-07-23 23:00 +0200
      Re: Odd character, was Re: buster, ekiga. Greg Wooledge <wooledg@eeg.ccf.org> - 2019-07-23 21:40 +0200
        Re: Odd character, was Re: buster, ekiga. <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2019-07-23 22:10 +0200
      Re: Odd character, was Re: buster, ekiga. Michael Stone <mstone@debian.org> - 2019-07-23 21:40 +0200
        Re: Odd character, was Re: buster, ekiga. David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2019-07-25 18:40 +0200
    Re: buster, ekiga. rhkramer@gmail.com - 2019-07-24 13:20 +0200
      Re: buster, ekiga. David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2019-07-24 16:40 +0200
        Re: buster, ekiga. Michael Stone <mstone@debian.org> - 2019-07-24 19:20 +0200
          Re: buster, ekiga. <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2019-07-24 19:30 +0200
            Re: buster, ekiga. Michael Stone <mstone@debian.org> - 2019-07-24 20:00 +0200
              Re: buster, ekiga. Greg Wooledge <wooledg@eeg.ccf.org> - 2019-07-24 23:00 +0200
              Re: buster, ekiga. Sven Joachim <svenjoac@gmx.de> - 2019-07-24 23:00 +0200
                Re: buster, ekiga. <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2019-07-24 23:10 +0200
              Re: buster, ekiga. David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2019-07-24 23:00 +0200
                Re: buster, ekiga. <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2019-07-24 23:10 +0200
                Re: buster, ekiga. Greg Wooledge <wooledg@eeg.ccf.org> - 2019-07-24 23:20 +0200
                Re: buster, ekiga. <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2019-07-24 23:30 +0200
                Re: buster, ekiga. David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2019-07-25 18:40 +0200
                Re: buster, ekiga. Michael Stone <mstone@debian.org> - 2019-07-25 13:40 +0200
  Re: buster, ekiga. Brad Rogers <brad@fineby.me.uk> - 2019-07-23 17:30 +0200

csiph-web