Re: Fwd: Problems sending mail from .mumble

["Christopher Morrow" <christopher.morrow () gmail com>]

On Mon, Apr 14, 2008 at 11:17 AM,  <Valdis.Kletnieks () vt edu> wrote:
> On Sun, 13 Apr 2008 17:50:25 EDT, Barry Shein said:
>
>  >  > So this is (yet another) fishing expidition -- as MIME types are a handy
>  >  > list, if any of those strings were present in a header, as in
>  >  > mail-from-foo () bar MIME-TYPE, would any well-known thingee choke?
>
>  As a practical matter, 'bar.mime-type' had better be a proper DNS entry, or
>  a lot of places that do a "is the address at least putatively returnable?"
>  test (which *should* be essentially 100% - does anybody *not* check this?),
>  they will find it won't go very far.

It's got some interesting implications if it's: domain.exe ... 'did
you mean to go to domain.exe or execute domain.exe or display
domain.pdf ?' the UI folks will have a headache with that I bet... I
could see a rule set (simplified) like:

1) if -f domain.exe && -x domain.exe ; then exec(domain.exe)
2) if ! -f domain.exe ; then openlocation(domain.exe)

that would be fun in the world of site-finder, eh? I wonder what word
or excel or '$application' does with a random blob of html foo shoved
down it's throat??

Is it still the case that folks thinking about site-finder believe
'all the world is a web-browser' ??? Seriously?

>  As a second practical matter, I suspect that all the places that have already
>  decided that '*.biz' is a cesspool will be even more dubious accepting mail
>  from 'foo@bar.application.octet-stream'.

and here I took the 'bar.mime-type' to be: domain.exe or domain.mp3 or
domain.pdf ... Barry, which do you mean? (or which did Eric mean)