Re: [Tools-discuss] emails being truncated

'Toerless Eckert' <tte@cs.fau.de> Wed, 21 July 2021 16:55 UTC

Return-Path: <eckert@i4.informatik.uni-erlangen.de>
X-Original-To: tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F234F3A1EEE for <tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 21 Jul 2021 09:55:41 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.888
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.888 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SPF_HELO_TEMPERROR=0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id AVJU-YqAP1kl for <tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 21 Jul 2021 09:55:34 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from faui40.informatik.uni-erlangen.de (faui40.informatik.uni-erlangen.de [131.188.34.40]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8514A3A1EED for <tools-discuss@ietf.org>; Wed, 21 Jul 2021 09:55:34 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from faui48e.informatik.uni-erlangen.de (faui48e.informatik.uni-erlangen.de [131.188.34.51]) by faui40.informatik.uni-erlangen.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 07AA3548053; Wed, 21 Jul 2021 18:55:28 +0200 (CEST)
Received: by faui48e.informatik.uni-erlangen.de (Postfix, from userid 10463) id 013744E7AE5; Wed, 21 Jul 2021 18:55:27 +0200 (CEST)
Date: Wed, 21 Jul 2021 18:55:27 +0200
From: 'Toerless Eckert' <tte@cs.fau.de>
To: "STARK, BARBARA H" <bs7652@att.com>, glen@amsl.com, john-ietf@jck.com
Cc: "'tools-discuss@ietf.org'" <tools-discuss@ietf.org>
Message-ID: <20210721165527.GP57276@faui48e.informatik.uni-erlangen.de>
References: <DM6PR02MB692463A7818126FD5CD2820FC3119@DM6PR02MB6924.namprd02.prod.outlook.com> <20210716161105.GM24216@faui48e.informatik.uni-erlangen.de> <DM6PR02MB6924E161BADFE55363DE4C03C3E39@DM6PR02MB6924.namprd02.prod.outlook.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <DM6PR02MB6924E161BADFE55363DE4C03C3E39@DM6PR02MB6924.namprd02.prod.outlook.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tools-discuss/i2Oas5PqqOAgkcMMdt49L1f4aRQ>
Subject: Re: [Tools-discuss] emails being truncated
X-BeenThere: tools-discuss@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF Tools Discussion <tools-discuss.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/tools-discuss>, <mailto:tools-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/tools-discuss/>
List-Post: <mailto:tools-discuss@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:tools-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tools-discuss>, <mailto:tools-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 21 Jul 2021 16:55:42 -0000

Thanks, Barbara, but i can still not make out heds or tails
(adding Glen and John)

a) Was the bug now fixed ? Aka: when you repeat this, will it work now ?

b) Whether fixed or not, which piece of software is the culprit ?

AFAIK:

The "old" behavior you refer to is the standard SMTP end-of-mail-data
"<CRLF>.<CRLF>" behavior of 1982 RFC821 section 3.1  that must go
along with the transparency procedure of section 4.5.2. Current
SMTP RFC5321 does not change this behavior.

So, you can see why i am curious about any software having a bug
about a procedure that has been used in gazillions (too many to count)
of emails since 1982.

The way you describe it sounds as if an Exchane server must be
speaking SMTP, and it is folding long lines AFTER performing the
SMTP transparency fixup, which is the wrong order. 

The only SMTP server/message-receiver side issue i can think of is
confusion introduced when going beyond ASCII about what constitutes
a ".". RFC5321 hints at this, but does not explain the breaking workflow.

Cheers
    Toerless

On Wed, Jul 21, 2021 at 03:33:35PM +0000, STARK, BARBARA H wrote:
> Following up for those who may be curious...
> I did email the support team with copies of the sent and received versions of emails. Glen correctly diagnosed the problem.
> My email contained a line with exactly 76 characters, with last character ".", and followed by carriage return. Apparently, my Exchange server wrapped this line at 75 characters to put that "." all by itself on a line (with the carriage return).
> The emails I received were being truncated directly before that ".".
> This is a known bizarre issue.
> https://unix.stackexchange.com/questions/38156/sendmail-procmail-exchange-truncating-mail
> 
> The answer there explains that
> " - Exchange: on accepting a piece of mail for delivery, it appears to reformat a plain text message, encoding and wrapping its lines to 75 characters.
>    - sendmail: An old (but known) behaviour was being followed in that mail with a bare period on a line was interpreted as end-of-message and then delivered, effectively truncating the actual mail body."
> 
> Well, I feel better now.
> 
> Barbara
> 
> > Do you have an example date / message id of such an email ?
> > 
> > Does the dnssd email archive have the email untruncated but only group
> > members
> > report that it was truncated on their end, or is it also truncated on the
> > list archive ?
> > 
> > I had once email recently from an AD via draft-alias and WG expander,
> > which arrived truncated on my side, but made it untruncated to
> > the WG alias.
> > 
> > Alas, i have not been able to track thast one down, even
> > through it was a mayor issue for me (AD review of one of my drafts
> > that i received truncated. Imagine how i felt when the AD told me:
> > why did you stop fixing nits after 25% of my review... ;-))
> > 
> > Cheers
> >     Toerless
> > 
> > On Fri, Jul 16, 2021 at 02:50:51PM +0000, STARK, BARBARA H wrote:
> > > My emails (to dnssd@ietf.org) are suddenly being strangely truncated. I've
> > never seen this before. Is anyone else experiencing this, or experienced this in
> > the past?
> > > Barbara
> > >
> > > ___________________________________________________________
> > > Tools-discuss mailing list - Tools-discuss@ietf.org
> > > This list is for discussion, not for action requests or bug reports.
> > > * Report datatracker and mailarchive bugs to: datatracker-project@ietf.org
> > > * Report tools.ietf.org bugs to: webmaster@tools.ietf.org
> > > * Report all other bugs or issues to: ietf-action@ietf.org
> > > List info (including how to Unsubscribe):
> > https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tools-
> > discuss__;!!BhdT!y69XSrVx9_N0CqsoYvkdc4xaLGtXfH6kh-
> > qvbmUhVIgNfw0yBw6GXgb2ZApVtA$
> > 
> > --
> > ---
> > tte@cs.fau.de

-- 
---
tte@cs.fau.de