5 messages in net.sourceforge.lists.courier-sqwebmailRe: [sqwebmail] Sqwebmail composed em...
FromSent OnAttachments
EndaJul 14, 2008 9:12 am 
Sam VarshavchikJul 14, 2008 3:34 pm 
EndaJul 15, 2008 1:03 am 
Sam VarshavchikJul 15, 2008 4:07 am 
EndaJul 15, 2008 4:20 am 
Actions with this message:
Paste this link in email or IM:
Paste this link in email or IM:
Atom feed for this thread
Paste this URL into your reader:
Subject:Re: [sqwebmail] Sqwebmail composed email messages problem.Actions...
From:Sam Varshavchik (mrs@courier-mta.com)
Date:Jul 15, 2008 4:07:26 am
List:net.sourceforge.lists.courier-sqwebmail

Enda writes:

Sam wrote:

You are unclear in your explanation, as to whether messages received by sqwebmail show an incorrect attachment name, or whether messages sent from sqwebmail show an incorrect attachment name when download by some other mail client. I believe that it's the latter, but you are not clear.

It is what is received by the third party is what gets renamed.

If this is the latter, try renaming the file before attaching it, to exclude any punctuation, spaces, or non-English characters from the filename (except for a single .extension). When present, they cause the attachment's name to be encoded according to certain standards which some poorly written mail clients may not be able to process. In any case, no renaming of any attachment occurs on any server, it's just that the mail client that downloads the attachment fails to properly implement the applicable Internet standards.

The testcase is a single pdf file named brochure.pdf

I send it through courier from a regular MUA, recipient receives brochure.pdf attachment. I send it through couerier from sqwebmail, receipient receives brochure.dat attachment

Only the three letter extension is changed, and while I am confident that it is happening entirely on the third party server, the only time it happens is when the attachment originates from sqwebmail.

Seems to me that it is something to do with the envelope encoding used by sqwebmail, and just wondering if that can be changed.

"Envelope encoding" is completely meaningless in this context. Nothing needs to be done, in absence of any evidence that anything needs to be done. If you Cc a copy of the message to a separate mailbox, after examining the message you should not find anything wrong with its headers. If the receipient's mail client is broken, the recipient's client needs to be fixed.