Viewer has buggy support around showing recipient "groups" (RFC822)
Categories
(MailNews Core :: MIME, defect)
Tracking
(Not tracked)
People
(Reporter: hurtta+mozilla2, Unassigned)
References
()
Details
(Whiteboard: For description, see also bug 83516)
Attachments
(5 files)
| Reporter | ||
Comment 1•23 years ago
|
||
| Reporter | ||
Comment 2•23 years ago
|
||
Comment 3•23 years ago
|
||
| Reporter | ||
Comment 4•23 years ago
|
||
| Reporter | ||
Comment 5•23 years ago
|
||
Comment 6•23 years ago
|
||
| Reporter | ||
Comment 7•23 years ago
|
||
Updated•23 years ago
|
Comment 9•23 years ago
|
||
Updated•23 years ago
|
Comment 10•23 years ago
|
||
Updated•23 years ago
|
Updated•23 years ago
|
| Reporter | ||
Comment 11•23 years ago
|
||
Comment 12•23 years ago
|
||
Comment 13•23 years ago
|
||
Comment 14•23 years ago
|
||
Comment 15•23 years ago
|
||
Updated•23 years ago
|
Comment 16•22 years ago
|
||
Comment 17•22 years ago
|
||
Comment 18•22 years ago
|
||
| Reporter | ||
Comment 19•21 years ago
|
||
Comment 20•21 years ago
|
||
| Reporter | ||
Comment 21•21 years ago
|
||
Comment 22•21 years ago
|
||
| Reporter | ||
Comment 23•21 years ago
|
||
Updated•20 years ago
|
Updated•20 years ago
|
Updated•20 years ago
|
Updated•20 years ago
|
Updated•19 years ago
|
| Assignee | ||
Updated•17 years ago
|
Comment 25•6 years ago
|
||
TCW does this reproduce for you?
Comment 26•6 years ago
|
||
(In reply to Wayne Mery (:wsmwk) from comment #25)
TCW does this reproduce for you?
Honestly, no. I've never gotten an email formatted as "To: <;>" or something similar and I searched through 20 years of email I still have. I checked against what's also mentioned in bug 607947. Some of what's mentioned in bug 83516 is valid and maybe some email processing systems (sendmail, etc.,) were out of spec (or someone kludged the spec) back 15+ years ago and allowed this to fly but today, not possible. We use a couple single-email-to-multiple-recipients here at my org and it always comes through as "To: <single-email-to-multiple-recipients>".
If there's a newer STR, I'd like to try it. But reading through some of the other steps and info from older comments above and the other associated bugs, this just doesn't seem valid anymore.
| Reporter | ||
Comment 27•6 years ago
|
||
I've never gotten an email formatted as "To: <;>"
Well, that was not about that ';' is inside of '<' and '>' characters.
I quoted syntax on comment #21
Group syntax is
group name : list of addressess ;
Special case, where list of addresses is empty, is common.
I rarely use group syntax where list of addresses is non-empty.
Many systems seems misparse them.
Another thing is that someones try use ; as address separator.
That ; is not address separator.
Some systems seems remove group syntax, so that IMAP client does not see it either.
/ Kari Hurtta
Comment 28•6 years ago
|
||
(In reply to Kari Hurtta from comment #27)
I've never gotten an email formatted as "To: <;>"
Well, that was not about that ';' is inside of '<' and '>' characters.
I quoted syntax on comment #21
Group syntax is
group name : list of addressess ;
Ok, I must have misunderstood.
Comment 29•6 years ago
|
||
I just now tested Thunderbird 60.8.0 ESR, and it appears to handle RFC5322 group constructs correctly.
For this test message:
From: James Ralston <username@example.org>
To: group-test: <username@example.org>;
Subject: test of groups syntax
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
This is a test message; please ignore.
…Thunderbird shows a To: header of Me <username@example.org>. That is, it realized that there was a single address in the To: header, and realized that it was my own address.
For this message:
From: undisclosed-recipients:;
To: group-test:;
Subject: group test
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
This is a test message; please ignore.
…if I execute the reply function, in the composition window, the To: header is empty. And the quoted message is:
On 2019-07-22 11:17, wrote:
> This is a test message; please ignore.
Meaning, Thunderbird treated the To: header as effectively being empty.
Perhaps if I performed exhaustive tests of every possible RFC5322 group constructs variant, I could find a corner case where Thunderbird misbehaves. But from this brief testing, Thunderbird appears to handle RFC5322 group constructs correctly.
Comment 30•6 years ago
|
||
(In reply to James Ralston from comment #29)
I just now tested Thunderbird 60.8.0 ESR, and it appears to handle RFC5322 group constructs correctly.
For this test message:
From: James Ralston <username@example.org> To: group-test: <username@example.org>; Subject: test of groups syntax MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain This is a test message; please ignore.…Thunderbird shows a
To:header ofMe <username@example.org>. That is, it realized that there was a single address in theTo:header, and realized that it was my own address.For this message:
From: undisclosed-recipients:; To: group-test:; Subject: group test MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain This is a test message; please ignore.…if I execute the reply function, in the composition window, the
To:header is empty. And the quoted message is:On 2019-07-22 11:17, wrote: > This is a test message; please ignore.Meaning, Thunderbird treated the
To:header as effectively being empty.Perhaps if I performed exhaustive tests of every possible RFC5322 group constructs variant, I could find a corner case where Thunderbird misbehaves. But from this brief testing, Thunderbird appears to handle RFC5322 group constructs correctly.
James,
Thanks for testing and validating the behavior. I agree that with enough testing, there's likely to be one or two obscure outliers. I would surmise though that given this bug's age, much of what's need to be in compliance with the spec has happened over that period of years. Wayne or others might chime with some other ideas as to what might trip an issue with the spec.
Comment 31•6 years ago
|
||
(In reply to Arthur K. from comment #30)
I agree that with enough testing, there's likely to be one or two obscure outliers.
For all practical purposes, the only time when RFC5322 group constructs are used is when they are empty; that is, the undisclosed-recipients:; case. If Thunderbird handles that case correctly, then even if there are one or two obscure outliers, I doubt anyone will ever find them in normal use.
The only potential bug I can find is that Thunderbird does not permit composing messages directly to RFC5322 group constructs.
Specifically, in the composition window, if I attempt to use undisclosed-recipients:; as a recipient address, Thunderbird gives me this error message when I attempt to send the message:
undisclosed-recipients:; <> is not a valid e-mail address because it is not of the form user@host. You must correct it before sending the e-mail.
Attempting to send to group-test: <username@example.org>; results in this error message:
An error occurred while sending mail. The mail server responded:
5.1.1 <"undisclosed-recipients: username"@example.org>... user or mailing list unknown.
Please check the message recipient ""undisclosed-recipients: username"@example.org" and try again.
But I would argue that it is not worth the effort to support RFC5322 group constructs in composition, because equivalent functionality is available:
- For the empty group case, where you want the
To:header to be present but effectively empty, just omit theTo:header from your message. When Thunderbird sends your message, it will add aTo:header to it, with a value ofundisclosed-recipients:;. - For the non-empty group case, just enumerate the individual addresses.
So, in summary:
- Thunderbird correctly handles RFC5322 group constructs when parsing messages.
- While Thunderbird does not permit composing a message directly to an RFC5322 group construct, if the user sends a message that lacks a
To:header, Thunderbird will add aTo: undisclosed-recipients:;header to the message in order to avoid having a message without aTo:header. (This is important, because many MTA will synthesize aTo:header if one is not already present in the message.)
I don't use SeaMonkey, so I can't easily test it, but if it is using the same MailNews Core engine that Thunderbird is using, I would expect its results to be the same.
| Reporter | ||
Comment 32•6 years ago
|
||
Wayne or others might chime with some other ideas as to what might trip an issue with the spec.
Perhaps test case where there several addresses on group and also addresses outside of group and several groups. Partially from comment #21
To: First group: Kuno Meyer <kuno.meyer@gmx.ch>, Second User <username@example.org>;, Full Name <gisler.st@bluewin.ch>, Second group: Other User <username2@example.org>;
First group
Kuno Meyer
Second User
Full Name
Second group
Other User
need parse as phrase !
Groups are separated by , when that , also used for for separating of addresses
( Inside of < > that , and : are used on route addresses (deprecated) )
Note that on my example makes both ; and , when there is other addresses or groups after end of group
On your test you was using
group-test
when my original report consist case where group name is phrase with several words
From: Sonera Plaza Oy <Internetpalvelut@sonera.fi>
To: Sonera Internet-asiakkaat:;
On comment #29 there is no case where group phrase parsing is tested.
/ Kari Hurtta
Comment 33•4 years ago
|
||
The groups are shown correctly nowadays. There are some minor bugs around the recipient related functionality (context menu, contact star) and such though.
Updated•3 years ago
|
Description
•