 | Start a set with this search |
 | Include this search in one of my sets |
 | Exclude this search from one of my sets |
 | Permalink to these results Paste this link in email or IM: |
 | Atom feed for tracking future search results Paste this URL into your reader: |
4 messages in net.sourceforge.lists.courier-sqwebmailRe: [sqwebmail] attachment name problems| From | Sent On | Attachments |
|---|---|---|
| Ricardo Santos | Sep 3, 2004 3:26 pm | |
| Sam Varshavchik | Sep 3, 2004 4:31 pm | |
| Ricardo Santos | Sep 6, 2004 9:26 am | |
| Jim Horner | Sep 6, 2004 10:56 am |
| Permalink for this message Paste this link in email or IM: |
| Permalink for this thread Paste this link in email or IM: |
| Atom feed for this thread Paste this URL into your reader: |
| Subject: | Re: [sqwebmail] attachment name problems | Actions... |
|---|---|---|
| From: | Ricardo Santos (ric...@yahoo.com) | |
| Date: | Sep 6, 2004 9:26:31 am | |
| List: | net.sourceforge.lists.courier-sqwebmail | |
Hi.
--- Sam Varshavchik <mrs...@courier-mta.com> wrote:
Ricardo Santos writes:
I have sqwebmail-4.0.7 (problem also with sqwebmail-4.0.6). When I send an email with an attachment with spaces in its name and read that email on Outlook (any version) the attachment name es
Looks like it isn't a sqwebmail problem code but maybe from a prerequisite or dependency program or library in the host system or even an elaborated ./configure or use of an especific auth-module.
No. Outlook does not implement RFC 2231-formatted mail headers.
I see...
I used to work with sqwebmail-3.3.2 on Suse 7.1 and vpopmail-5.2.1 without any problem, a couple of
months
RFC 2231 was implemented in sqwebmail 3.4.0, which was released about two years ago.
RFC 2231 was standardized seven years ago. If you would like to know why Microsoft's software does not implement a seven year old standard for formatting mail headers, only Microsoft can answer that question for you.
I saw that RFC 2231 is implemented in the Exchange 2000 Server SDK and in the Exchange Server 2003 SDK.
http://search.microsoft.com/search/results.aspx?st=b&na=88&View=en-us&qu=RFC+2231 It's strange that the server has this implementation but the clients.
So what to do? I have hundreds of clients useing Outlook. Should I have to wait 5 years to Microsoft implement an 7 years old RFC like Sqwebmail did?
I wonder how mail admins with Outlook clients are dealing with this problem. Did they hack code? Installed Netscape MUA? Changed it's job?
The mail file inside the maildir with a problematic attachment looks like:
--=_0_13980_1094247328 Content-Disposition: attachment; filename*0*=utf-8'en-us'Friends%20Theme.mp3 Content-Type: audio/mpeg; name*0*=iso-8859-1''Friends%20Theme.mp3 Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
Right. See RFC 2231.
I did, it looks good, but if we know that in some (or a lot of) cases Microsoft wasn't, isn't (and won't??) respect this documents why to ignore this situation and implement them (the RFC's) without any transparent way (not any note in bugs, readme, install, todo) to deal with Microsoft's software behaviour? Are we becomeing like Microsoft ignoring the others?
Finally. My enterprise email solution is very good, very fast, and with a low cost of maintenancy and operation (thanks to the open source). What do I do to solve or deal with this problem?
_______________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Win 1 of 4,000 free domain names from Yahoo! Enter now. http://promotions.yahoo.com/goldrush