Outlook does not conform with RFC-5322

[Matthew Black]

I’ve had a pet peeve with Microsoft Outlook for a long time and now that we are in the middle of transitioning from CGP to Exchange, the problem is much more apparent.

 

Is it just me, or is anyone else bothered by Microsoft Outlook’s long-standing failure to insert a full e-mail address in the From: and To: headers of an e-mail message? I understand some people get confused by that silly “Full Name” <us...@domain.tld> addressing notation and only want to see the sender or recipient name. However, this makes troubleshooting very difficult.

 

It seems that Outlook does not conform with RFC-5322 (RFC-822), sections 3.4 and 3.6.2:

 

http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5322#section-3.4 (Address Specification)

http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5322#section-3.6.2 (Originator Fields)

 

 

Am I misreading the RFC, or has anybody else noticed this irregularity?

 

matthew black

systems administrator

information technology services

california state university, long beach

 

 

[Graeme Fowler]

Matthew Black wrote:
> Is it just me
<snipped>

I believe it might be. Messages internal to Exchange are not RFC5322 format messages, so Outlook and Exchange can display what they like.

If you look at a message sent from Outlook via Exchange to a non-Exchange account via SMTP, they're fine (full name - actually the AD attribute 'displayName' and address are there).

If you look at a message sent from a non-Exchange account via SMTP to an Exchange user in Outlook, it's fine (full name and address are there *if* the message had them before they hit Exchange).

If you look at a message sent by one Outlook user to another in the same Exchange organisation which has *never* used SMTP in transit, only the name is displayed. This is perfectly acceptable at a protocol level because internally Exchange isn't using RFC5322 formatting.

If I've misunderstood the point, please tell me :)

Graeme

#############################################################
This message is sent to you because you are subscribed to
the mailing list <CGat...@mail.stalker.com>.
To unsubscribe, E-mail to: <CGateP...@mail.stalker.com>
To switch to the DIGEST mode, E-mail to <CGatePr...@mail.stalker.com>
To switch to the INDEX mode, E-mail to <CGatePr...@mail.stalker.com>
Send administrative queries to <CGatePro...@mail.stalker.com>

[Tom Rymes]

On 01/05/2012 12:32 PM, Matthew Black wrote:

<snip>

> It seems that Outlook does not conform with RFC-5322 (RFC-822), sections
> 3.4 and 3.6.2:

<snip>

Matthew: I think you are well over a decade late in complaining that
Outlook does not comply with the RFCs...

Tom

[Sean Shepard]

Working through an issue buddies on Polycom phones with Communigate 5.4.

Initially, it appears that the a permission was pending to allow the
buddies to see each other. This was resolved via Pronto which
immediately popped up the request and it was acknowledged. However, the
test station now attempts to show status of one of its buddies but it is
never accurate. Any insight or clues into where to hunt would be
appreciated ... (configuration excerpts from the phones are below).

My <mac>-directory.xml looks like (with reciprocal entries on each test
station):

<?xml version="1.0" standalone="yes"?>
<directory>
<item_list>
<item>
<fn>name</fn>
<ct>606</ct>
<sd>1</sd>
<rt>0</rt>
<dc />
<ad>0</ad>
<ar>0</ar>
<bw>1</bw>
<bb>0</bb>
</item>
</item_list>
</directory>

... in the <phone>.cfg file includes:

<feature
feature.1.name="presence" feature.1.enabled="1"
feature.2.name="messaging" feature.2.enabled="1"
feature.3.name="directory" feature.3.enabled="1"
...


Thanks a bunch.