Everyone knows what an email address is, right? (Quiz)
-
This post did not contain any content.
Pretty much everything I've seen in e-mail is needlessly complicated and weird. So of course addresses are as well.
-
It does say it's valid, but also that it's obsolete, and while the RFC does define valid but obsolete specs, there is nothing defining domains without a dot as obsolete, and it is in fact defined in the regular spec, not the obsolete section
I see what you mean, I'm with you now.
-
Two of my "favorite" features it didn't even touch on. You can have nested comments:
foo(one(two(three(four(five(six(seven)))))))@example.comThis will actually fail on that big email regex that gets copied around (originally from Mastering Regular Expressions in 1997), because it can only handle comment nesting to a depth of six. It is actually possible to do indefinite nesting now with recursive regex, but it was developed before that feature existed.
RFC822 also allows routing addresses through multiple servers:
<@[email protected]:[email protected]>But this is almost always denied on modern email servers because it was abused by spammers.
The routing feature is so cursed XD
-
This post did not contain any content.
I don't think it really matters what the standard is, because you'll be completely limited by some 25 year old bit of Regex from Stack Overflow that every web developer ever has implemented into their form sanity checks.
-
I don't think it really matters what the standard is, because you'll be completely limited by some 25 year old bit of Regex from Stack Overflow that every web developer ever has implemented into their form sanity checks.
The main one that gets passed around will match the weirdness fine. In fact, it probably matches things you don't want, anyway.
A signin/registration form really only needs to do sanity checks to get rid of obviously bad addresses. You'll have to send a round-trip email confirmation message to make sure the email is real, anyway, so why bother going into great detail? Just check that there's an '@' symbol and a dot in the domain. Most of the rest is wanking off.
-
::: spoiler Tap for spoiler
Email addresses can have comments?!
:::wrote last edited by [email protected]Nested comments. RFC822 had a whole bunch of bad ideas in it, but nobody thought much of it at the time. Most programming languages don't even do nested comments, because they want to filter them out with a simple lexer before the grammar ever sees it.
-
The main one that gets passed around will match the weirdness fine. In fact, it probably matches things you don't want, anyway.
A signin/registration form really only needs to do sanity checks to get rid of obviously bad addresses. You'll have to send a round-trip email confirmation message to make sure the email is real, anyway, so why bother going into great detail? Just check that there's an '@' symbol and a dot in the domain. Most of the rest is wanking off.
A domaine without tld (me@home) is a valide address.
I saw an email server being used as a mqtt-like server this way (it is very old and predate those software). -
A domaine without tld (me@home) is a valide address.
I saw an email server being used as a mqtt-like server this way (it is very old and predate those software).An address without a domain is irrelevant for a signin/registration form. Which is like 90% of the code being written in the wild to validate addresses.
If you're writing an email server, then you need to care about all these details. Most of us never will.
-
This post did not contain any content.
I don't care who the IRS sends, I am not validating emails with spaces on them.
-
This post did not contain any content.
I got 13/21. I mean thats not bad
-
This post did not contain any content.
What if we
@
..? 🤠-
I can't even view it...I get a TLS error
I get "not found". You got farther than me.
-
This post did not contain any content.
Wow. if I ever have the madness required to self-host, I'll have my email at an IP address.
-
I don't care who the IRS sends, I am not validating emails with spaces on them.
You shouldn’t be validating emails yourself anyway. Use a library or check for only the
@and then send an email confirmation. -
Same. I answered what i thought was correct and got 14!
14/21 gang
-
I'm gonna have a mailbox per device and the addresses will be deviceip@serverip. [email protected].
-
This post did not contain any content.
I don't validate emails, I test them.
That's your email? OK, what did we send it? if we couldn't send to it or the user can't read it there's no reason to accept it.
OK, maybe I do some light validation first, but I don't trust the email address just because it's email-address-shaped.
-
I'm gonna have a mailbox per device and the addresses will be deviceip@serverip. [email protected].
Needs to be IPv6, including support for subnets to message multiple devices
-
I don't validate emails, I test them.
That's your email? OK, what did we send it? if we couldn't send to it or the user can't read it there's no reason to accept it.
OK, maybe I do some light validation first, but I don't trust the email address just because it's email-address-shaped.
What kind of "light validation"? I'm guessing a
.*@.*regex match. -
What kind of "light validation"? I'm guessing a
.*@.*regex match.@matches
