Hacker News Reader

Comment by Xorlev | Hacker News Reader

At this point, our email validity criteria:

.+@.+\..{2,}

That is, at least one character for the inbox, at least one character for the domain, at least two for the TLD (we assume that TLD-less domains are undeliverable by us). This ensures we don't allow 'a@a' or 'a@a.a', but do allow 'a@a.io'.

View on HN

This might already filter out legitimate users.

  dig MX io.

Also, you don't know what new TLDs ICANN might come up with at some point. I am pretty sure there are service providers that do and did limit the TLD length and then TLDs like xn--vermgensberatung-pwb came up.

a@[IPv6:2001::1] is, unfortunately for your validation regex, a valid e-mail address.

[EDIT: I see that you consider TLD-free e-mail addresses undeliverable; still!]

  .+@.+

FTW?

That's what we do. Everything else is just lying to yourself and hoping for the best..

Enjoy getting a billion e-mails per second written to root@localhost

As if. There would be a single confirmation email sent which would not be clicked.

Or, more simply, `.@.`.

That wouldn't allow ceo@cocacola, which is a valid email address (I don't know if mail will be delivered to it, but cocacola is an actual TLD).

Ian Goldberg once maintained the email address <n@ai>, touted as the shortest possible. An edge case, but it would fail your validation.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com