Jiankang YAO | 2 Dec 2010 09:54
Picon

with protocol types Re: AD review of draft-ietf-eai-rfc5336bis-04.txt


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Alexey Melnikov" <alexey.melnikov <at> isode.com>
To: "EAI WG" <ima <at> ietf.org>
Sent: Saturday, November 27, 2010 9:10 PM
Subject: Re: [EAI] AD review of draft-ietf-eai-rfc5336bis-04.txt

> Alexey Melnikov wrote:
> 
>> 4.  IANA Considerations
>>
>>   +---------------+-----------------------------+---------------------+
>>   | WITH protocol | Description                 | Reference           |
>>   | types         |                             |                     |
>>   +---------------+-----------------------------+---------------------+
>>   | UTF8SMTPbis   | UTF8SMTPbis with Service    | [RFCXXXX]           |
>>   |               | Extensions                  |                     |
>>   | UTF8SMTPbisA  | UTF8SMTPbis with SMTP AUTH  | [RFC4954] [RFCXXXX] |
>>   | UTF8SMTPbisS  | UTF8SMTPbis with STARTTLS   | [RFC3207] [RFCXXXX] |
>>   | UTF8SMTPbisSA | UTF8SMTPbis with both       | [RFC3207] [RFC4954] |
>>   |               | STARTTLS and SMTP AUTH      | [RFCXXXX]           |
>>   +---------------+-----------------------------+---------------------+
>>
>> Do we really need to change the WITH protocol types?
> 
> I remembered one more thing: if other LMTP related changes are done, 
> this section should also register values for LMTP. E.g. 
> UTF8LMTP/UTF8LMTPA/UTF8LMTPS/UTF8LMTPSA.
> 

(Continue reading)

Alexey Melnikov | 2 Dec 2010 13:57
Favicon

Re: with protocol types Re: AD review of draft-ietf-eai-rfc5336bis-04.txt

Jiankang YAO wrote:

>----- Original Message ----- 
>From: "Alexey Melnikov" <alexey.melnikov <at> isode.com>
>To: "EAI WG" <ima <at> ietf.org>
>Sent: Saturday, November 27, 2010 9:10 PM
>Subject: Re: [EAI] AD review of draft-ietf-eai-rfc5336bis-04.txt
>
>
>  
>
>>Alexey Melnikov wrote:
>>
>>    
>>
>>>4.  IANA Considerations
>>>
>>>  +---------------+-----------------------------+---------------------+
>>>  | WITH protocol | Description                 | Reference           |
>>>  | types         |                             |                     |
>>>  +---------------+-----------------------------+---------------------+
>>>  | UTF8SMTPbis   | UTF8SMTPbis with Service    | [RFCXXXX]           |
>>>  |               | Extensions                  |                     |
>>>  | UTF8SMTPbisA  | UTF8SMTPbis with SMTP AUTH  | [RFC4954] [RFCXXXX] |
>>>  | UTF8SMTPbisS  | UTF8SMTPbis with STARTTLS   | [RFC3207] [RFCXXXX] |
>>>  | UTF8SMTPbisSA | UTF8SMTPbis with both       | [RFC3207] [RFC4954] |
>>>  |               | STARTTLS and SMTP AUTH      | [RFCXXXX]           |
>>>  +---------------+-----------------------------+---------------------+
>>>
>>>Do we really need to change the WITH protocol types?
(Continue reading)

Alexey Melnikov | 2 Dec 2010 14:23
Favicon

draft-ietf-eai-rfc5336bis-05.txt

This version addressed most of my concerns and is a big improvement. 
Thank you. Outstanding changes are:

1) Change "UTF8SMTPbis" WITH keywords to "UTF8SMTP", etc.
2) Add LMTP specific WITH keywords
3) I think we need to collapse X.6.8 and Y.6.8 into 1 IANA registration 
(with all allowed status codes listed in 1 place). I.e.:

      Code:               X.6.8
      Sample Text:        UTF-8 string reply is required,
                          but not permitted by the client
      Associated basic status code:  553, 550, 252
      Description:        This indicates that a reply containing a UTF-8
                          string is required to show the mailbox name,
                          but that form of response is not
                          permitted by the client.
 ...

We also need to decide on what to do with X.6.10 - deprecate it in the 
registry?

Best Regards,
Alexey

P.S. I still need to check the updated ABNF, I will do this later.
Internet-Drafts | 2 Dec 2010 20:00
Picon
Favicon

I-D Action:draft-ietf-eai-rfc5335bis-04.txt

A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories.
This draft is a work item of the Email Address Internationalization Working Group of the IETF.

	Title           : Internationalized Email Headers
	Author(s)       :  . Yang, S. Steele
	Filename        : draft-ietf-eai-rfc5335bis-04.txt
	Pages           : 15
	Date            : 2010-12-02

Full internationalization of electronic mail requires not only the
capabilities to transmit non-ASCII content, to encode selected
information in specific header fields, and to use non-ASCII
characters in envelope addresses.  It also requires being able to
express those addresses and the information based on them in mail
header fields.  This document specifies a variant of Internet mail
that permits the use of Unicode encoded in UTF-8, rather than ASCII,
as the base form for Internet email header field.  This form is
permitted in transmission only if authorized by an SMTP extension, as
specified in an associated specification.  This specification updates
Section 6.4 of [RFC2045] to conform with the requirements.

A URL for this Internet-Draft is:
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-eai-rfc5335bis-04.txt

Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at:
ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/

Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader
implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the
Internet-Draft.
(Continue reading)

Internet-Drafts | 3 Dec 2010 09:15
Picon
Favicon

I-D Action:draft-ietf-eai-rfc5336bis-06.txt

A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories.
This draft is a work item of the Email Address Internationalization Working Group of the IETF.

	Title           : SMTP Extension for Internationalized Email Address
	Author(s)       : J. Yao, W. MAO
	Filename        : draft-ietf-eai-rfc5336bis-06.txt
	Pages           : 19
	Date            : 2010-12-03

This document specifies an SMTP extension for transport and delivery
of email messages with internationalized email addresses or header
information.  This document updates some syntax rules defined in RFC
5321 and RFC 5322.

A URL for this Internet-Draft is:
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-eai-rfc5336bis-06.txt

Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at:
ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/

Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader
implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the
Internet-Draft.
Attachment (draft-ietf-eai-rfc5336bis-06.txt): message/external-body, 70 bytes
_______________________________________________
IMA mailing list
IMA <at> ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ima
(Continue reading)

Jiankang YAO | 3 Dec 2010 09:15
Picon

Re: draft-ietf-eai-rfc5336bis-05.txt


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Alexey Melnikov" <alexey.melnikov <at> isode.com>
To: "Jiankang YAO" <yaojk <at> cnnic.cn>; "EAI WG" <ima <at> ietf.org>
Sent: Thursday, December 02, 2010 9:23 PM
Subject: draft-ietf-eai-rfc5336bis-05.txt

> This version addressed most of my concerns and is a big improvement. 
> Thank you. Outstanding changes are:
> 
> 1) Change "UTF8SMTPbis" WITH keywords to "UTF8SMTP", etc.
> 2) Add LMTP specific WITH keywords

updated. 

   +---------------+----------------------------+----------------------+
   | WITH protocol | Description                | Reference            |
   | types         |                            |                      |
   +---------------+----------------------------+----------------------+
   | UTF8SMTP      | UTF8SMTP with Service      | [RFCXXXX]            |
   |               | Extensions                 |                      |
   | UTF8SMTPA     | UTF8SMTP with SMTP AUTH    | [RFC4954] [RFCXXXX]  |
   | UTF8SMTPS     | UTF8SMTP with STARTTLS     | [RFC3207] [RFCXXXX]  |
   | UTF8SMTPSA    | UTF8SMTP with both         | [RFC3207] [RFC4954]  |
   |               | STARTTLS and SMTP AUTH     | [RFCXXXX]            |
   | UTF8LMTP      | UTF8LMTP with Service      | [RFCXXXX]            |
   |               | Extensions                 |                      |
   | UTF8LMTPA     | UTF8LMTP with LMTP AUTH    | [RFC4954] [RFCXXXX]  |
   | UTF8LMTPS     | UTF8LMTP with STARTTLS     | [RFC3207] [RFCXXXX]  |
   | UTF8LMTPSA    | UTF8LMTP with both         | [RFC3207] [RFC4954]  |
(Continue reading)

Alexey Melnikov | 3 Dec 2010 10:48
Favicon

Comments on the latest ABNF in draft-ietf-eai-rfc5335bis-04.txt

4.4.  Change on addr-spec Syntax

   uAddr-Spec      =  uLocal-Part " <at> " ( uDomain / address-literal )

This should be using RFC 5322, not RFC 5321 syntax. So, it shoul be:

 uAddr-Spec      =  uLocal-Part " <at> " uDomain

   address-literal =  <See Section 4.1.2 of RFC 5321>

This is not needed.

   uLocal-Part     =  uDot-String / uQuoted-String / obs-Local-Part
                      ; Replace Local-Part in Section 4.1.2 of RFC 5321

This should be using RFC 5322 syntax, not RFC 5321 syntax, so:

   uLocal-Part      =  uDot-Atom / uQuoted-String / obs-local-part

   uDot-string     =  uAtom *("." uAtom)
                      ; Replace Dot-string in RFC 5321, Section 4.1.2

Not needed

   uDomain         =  (sub-udomain 1*("." sub-uDomain)) /
                      dot-atom / domain-literal / obs-domain
                      ; Replace Domain in Section 4.1.2 of  RFC 5321

Should be:
   uDomain          =  uDot-Atom / domain-literal / obs-domain
(Continue reading)

Internet-Drafts | 3 Dec 2010 17:45
Picon
Favicon

I-D Action:draft-ietf-eai-rfc5335bis-05.txt

A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories.
This draft is a work item of the Email Address Internationalization Working Group of the IETF.

	Title           : Internationalized Email Headers
	Author(s)       :  . Yang, S. Steele
	Filename        : draft-ietf-eai-rfc5335bis-05.txt
	Pages           : 15
	Date            : 2010-12-03

Full internationalization of electronic mail requires not only the
capabilities to transmit non-ASCII content, to encode selected
information in specific header fields, and to use non-ASCII
characters in envelope addresses.  It also requires being able to
express those addresses and the information based on them in mail
header fields.  This document specifies a variant of Internet mail
that permits the use of Unicode encoded in UTF-8, rather than ASCII,
as the base form for Internet email header field.  This form is
permitted in transmission only if authorized by an SMTP extension, as
specified in an associated specification.  This specification updates
Section 6.4 of [RFC2045] to conform with the requirements.

A URL for this Internet-Draft is:
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-eai-rfc5335bis-05.txt

Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at:
ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/

Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader
implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the
Internet-Draft.
(Continue reading)

Alexey Melnikov | 3 Dec 2010 21:47
Favicon

2 remaining issues with draft-ietf-eai-rfc5335bis-05.txt ABNF


1) In Section 4.3:

uQuoted-Pair is defined twice:

 uQuoted-Pair   = ("\" (VCHAR / WSP / UTF8-non-ascii )) / obs-qp

and

 uQuoted-Pair   = ("\" uText) / obs-qp

I think the first version is correct, so the second needs to be deleted. 
However, looking at this made me thing: do we really need 
backslash-escaping of UTF-8? Firstly, in email without EAI a single 
character was always escaped, so I don't know how parsers are going to 
behave for multibyte UTF-8 sequences.
Secondly, do we really need escaping for UTF-8? UTF-8 is already allowed 
elsewhere unescaped. So maybe it would be easier just to forget about 
escaping of UTF-8.

If people agree, then the production uQuoted-Pair needs to be removed, 
together with all productions that reference it directly or indirectly.

2). I had the following comment on -04:

  description  = "Content-Description:" unstructured CRLF

  The <utext> syntax is extended above to allow UTF-8 in all
  <unstructured> header fields.

(Continue reading)

Shawn Steele | 3 Dec 2010 22:04
Picon
Favicon

5336bis

I was asked to look at 5336bis a bit more:

 

UTF8SMTPbis needs fixed everywhere (obviously).  IMO it should stay UTF8SMTP.

 

3.3 Extended mailbox address syntax says: “to permit either the definition above or…” in two places.  It would be easier for me if it said “to permit either the [RFC5321] definition above, or…”

 

ABNF & I don’t get along well, but nothing jumps out to me in that section.

 

In 3.6.3 I don’t get why received fields have to use A-labels at all?  I assume I missed a discussion?  It would seem to me that the end-points are all EAI aware, so it’s unclear to me why A-labels are necessary anywhere.

 

- Shawn

 

 

http://blogs.msdn.com/shawnste

(Selfhost 7891)

 

_______________________________________________
IMA mailing list
IMA <at> ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ima

Gmane