Hi John, Thanks for the feedback, much appreciated. I've made most of those changes now. A few responses below. Evan On 2018-08-09 16:55, John Levine wrote:
EAI-MUA-002, -006 what does validating addresses mean? Check syntax? Check domain?
Syntactic checks, yes. I've made this explicit now. If the software also validates the domain by hitting the DNS that's fine, but I didn't want to require that test executors set up working DNS for every single input.
EAI-MUA-078 It would be more useful to check that you can do STLS before UTF8. It's not up to the MUA to enforce POP server semantics.
I took this requirement from RFC 6856 ("Clients MUST NOT issue the "STLS" command after issuing UTF8"), but I think you're right that this is overly specific and not really helpful for this project. I've dropped this and EAI-MDA-032, which is the server-side bit.
-035 message-id should always be ASCII, even for EAI servers. This isn't a fail but it suggests something is wrong if not.
I've made the EAI case an advisory one, per RFC 6532 3.3. Easy to include while in the neighbourhood.
MSA tests:
In a lot of these it's not clear what you're testing, the MUA or the MSA to which it is submitting mail.
Always the MSA. I've tried to clarify this by now using the terms "client" for the MUA, "software" for the MSA under test, and "destination server" for the MTA to which it is relaying a message.
EAI-MTA-009, -010, -011 If this means you expect MSAs to re-code addresses or headers on the fly, they should not unless you can verify that they didn't break DKIM signatures when doing so.
Too true, I've added a note that DKIM should not be used for these test cases if the software applies recoding. Thanks again for the review. -- Evan Hanson Analyst and Programmer Catalyst IT - Open Source Technologists DDI: +64 4 803 2415 // Tel: +64 4 449 2267 // www.catalyst.net.nz