Re: Exception handling

On 9/29/2010 11:03 AM, Carl S. Gutekunst wrote:
>
> Hector Santos wrote:
>> There are 20+ years in the making and years past attempts to go 
>> strict (enforce by default) failed miserably in the support area.  
>> Regardless if it was just a few people, it created a 'surprise' and 
>> support cost. 
>
> Yep. Everywhere I've worked, I wanted to reject mail that was missing 
> the blank line (CRLF) between header and body. And everywhere I've 
> worked, my employer mandated otherwise because rejecting such mails 
> was a call generator. So, I've always implicitly inserted that blank 
> line at the point where I encounter text that doesn't appear to be a 
> header line.
All SMTP implementations I've ever been involved in have chosen this tactic.

> That has it's problems, too. I had an issue with a legit corporate 
> sender that added a malformed header line in the middle, before the 
> From: and To: fields. Result was that people's filters didn't work.
Garbage input leads to "interesting" results, no matter what choice was 
taken.

     Tony Hansen