SMTP Protocol Support #1201
SMTP Protocol Support #1201
Conversation
Codecov ReportAll modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## dev #1201 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 82.48% 82.64% +0.15%
==========================================
Files 161 163 +2
Lines 20770 20962 +192
Branches 7847 7962 +115
==========================================
+ Hits 17133 17324 +191
- Misses 2961 2964 +3
+ Partials 676 674 -2
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more. ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
This reverts commit 2915fa8.
|
@seladb I'll double check parsing with different SMTP packets but it's ready for review. |
@egecetin I think I understand now. But if the TCP port is SMTP (25 or 587) and the packet ends with |
|
Probably nothing we can do instead of checking of the session (at least i dont know) |
|
@seladb I saw your comments but still don't have time to fix them. I try to fix your comments and update the PR as soon as possible for protocol type changes. Sorry for the delay |
|
@seladb It's ready for review. You can check the PR when you have time |
| "xc90.websitewelcome.com ESMTP Exim 4.69 #1 Mon, 05 Oct 2009 01:05:54 -0500 220-We do not authorize " | ||
| "the use of this system to transport unsolicited, 220 and/or bulk e-mail."); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
In case of multiline, do we want to remove the status code from all the lines?
Meaning, remove 220- from the second and third lines?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I remember I also thought about it but to be honest I can't remember why I don't add any support for it. Let me check the code and protocol again before merging.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@seladb Updated the code for support it in both SMTP and FTP (They use same structure for it) but codecov-action currently broken because of node version (Check codecov/codecov-action#1230 and codecov/codecov-action#1228) so workflow is failing for now. Can you check the code again?
| vDelim.push_back(getCommandInternal() + "-"); | ||
| vDelim.push_back(getCommandInternal() + " "); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
nit: we could run getCommandInternal() only once and create + init the vector in one line:
auto option = getCommandInternal();
auto vDelim = std::vector<std::string> { option + " ", option + "-"}
No description provided.