[lug] e-mail addressing question

[Riggs, Rob]

RFC821/822 doesn't really concern itself much with local delivery issues,
leaving the "local part" of the email address at the discretion of the local
system. "The syntax of the local part of a mailbox must conform to receiver
site conventions and the syntax specified in section 4.1.2." So, as long as
it is a well formed email address (and both "+" and "-" are valid in the
local part), it is acceptable.

Is it desirable? Well, I certainly think so. I rarely give out "untagged"
email addresses to commercial entities any more.

I can't think of any credible security risks caused by email aliasing. (And
I only play a network security expert on TV.)

-Rob

-----Original Message-----
From: J. Wayde Allen [mailto:wallen at lug.boulder.co.us]
Sent: Thursday, December 13, 2001 2:20 PM
To: 'lug at lug.boulder.co.us'
Subject: RE: [lug] e-mail addressing question


On Thu, 13 Dec 2001, Riggs, Rob wrote:

Now the next level of questioning is whether or not allowing such dynamic
aliasing is part of RFC822 or not?  (I just looked and it wasn't obvious
to me.)  The other question is whether or not this is desirable behavior
for a mail system or not?  The last major question is whether or not this
is a security risk?

Curious anyway.

- Wayde
  (wallen at lug.boulder.co.us)

   --------------------------------------------------------
                        ISART 2002                          
    International Symposium on Advanced Radio Technologies 
      http://www.its.bldrdoc.gov/meetings/art/index.html  
   --------------------------------------------------------



_______________________________________________
Web Page:  http://lug.boulder.co.us
Mailing List: http://lists.lug.boulder.co.us/mailman/listinfo/lug