Re: [ietf-smtp] How is EAI mail implemented ?

Sam Varshavchik <> Tue, 15 June 2021 22:43 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 49E253A40CE for <>; Tue, 15 Jun 2021 15:43:46 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 1.436
X-Spam-Level: *
X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.436 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_PBL=3.335, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id GKmSlyiVUrDP for <>; Tue, 15 Jun 2021 15:43:42 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D8B3C3A40D1 for <>; Tue, 15 Jun 2021 15:43:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( [::ffff:]) (TLS: TLSv1.3,256bits,TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) by with UTF8SMTPS id 0000000000221036.0000000060C92D16.0000657B; Tue, 15 Jun 2021 18:43:34 -0400
Received: from (localhost []) (IDENT: uid 1004) by with UTF8SMTP id 00000000000208A1.0000000060C92D16.0000F198; Tue, 15 Jun 2021 18:43:34 -0400
References: <> <> <>
Message-ID: <>
From: Sam Varshavchik <>
Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2021 18:43:33 -0400
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary=""; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [ietf-smtp] =?utf-8?q?How_is_EAI_mail_implemented_=3F?=
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Discussion of issues related to Simple Mail Transfer Protocol \(SMTP\) \[RFC 821, RFC 2821, RFC 5321\]" <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2021 22:43:46 -0000

John R Levine writes:

>>> Nobody I've seen tags messages as EAI in their internal queues.
>> sendmail does:
> Huh.  Why does it set the UTF8 flag on MAIL FROM when sending ASCII messages?

A few months ago someone contacted me regarding "UASG030 EAI  
Testing Results for Courier". After swapping a few messages, the upshot was  
that, apparently, the testing apparatus that was employed in that endeavor  
expected SMTPUTF8 senders specify the UTF8 flag on anything that's sent to a  
receiver that advertises SMTPUTF8, even if it's pure ASCII.

I'm the kind that doesn't keep his INBOX forever. After everything was said  
and done that conversation didn't seem like something that needed to be  
archived, so I don't have the complete exchange any more, but that was the  
capsule summary of it. I couldn't quite see much sense in this myself,  
honestly, but neither did I see much of a reason to die on that specific  
hill, so I just made a few tweaks and moved on.

So, if the majority opinion here is that UTF8 does not need to be set on  
ASCII-only mail, then maybe somewhere would want to discuss this with that  
other group of people, over there.