(monday morning list address probs,sorry) ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Christopher Morrow <christopher.morrow@gmail.com> Date: Mon, Apr 14, 2008 at 1:21 PM Subject: Re: Fwd: Problems sending mail from .mumble To: Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu Cc: Barry Shein <bzs@world.std.com>, nanog@merit.edu, ebw@abenaki.wabanaki.net On Mon, Apr 14, 2008 at 11:17 AM, <Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu> wrote:
On Sun, 13 Apr 2008 17:50:25 EDT, Barry Shein said:
So this is (yet another) fishing expidition -- as MIME types are a handy list, if any of those strings were present in a header, as in mail-from-foo@bar.MIME-TYPE, would any well-known thingee choke?
As a practical matter, 'bar.mime-type' had better be a proper DNS entry, or a lot of places that do a "is the address at least putatively returnable?" test (which *should* be essentially 100% - does anybody *not* check this?), they will find it won't go very far.
It's got some interesting implications if it's: domain.exe ... 'did you mean to go to domain.exe or execute domain.exe or display domain.pdf ?' the UI folks will have a headache with that I bet... I could see a rule set (simplified) like: 1) if -f domain.exe && -x domain.exe ; then exec(domain.exe) 2) if ! -f domain.exe ; then openlocation(domain.exe) that would be fun in the world of site-finder, eh? I wonder what word or excel or '$application' does with a random blob of html foo shoved down it's throat?? Is it still the case that folks thinking about site-finder believe 'all the world is a web-browser' ??? Seriously?
As a second practical matter, I suspect that all the places that
have already
decided that '*.biz' is a cesspool will be even more dubious accepting mail from 'foo@bar.application.octet-stream'.
and here I took the 'bar.mime-type' to be: domain.exe or domain.mp3 or domain.pdf ... Barry, which do you mean? (or which did Eric mean)