Re: [ietf-smtp] Valid RFC5322 address

Viktor Dukhovni <ietf-dane@dukhovni.org> Mon, 04 May 2020 19:09 UTC

Return-Path: <ietf-dane@dukhovni.org>
X-Original-To: ietf-smtp@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf-smtp@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 964C13A13AF for <ietf-smtp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 4 May 2020 12:09:43 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.899
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id JVbK-Fc_btcR for <ietf-smtp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 4 May 2020 12:09:40 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from straasha.imrryr.org (straasha.imrryr.org [100.2.39.101]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 54B0C3A13AB for <ietf-smtp@ietf.org>; Mon, 4 May 2020 12:09:18 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.1.161] (unknown [192.168.1.161]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by straasha.imrryr.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 5CF6629C9E1 for <ietf-smtp@ietf.org>; Mon, 4 May 2020 15:09:17 -0400 (EDT)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.4 \(3608.80.23.2.2\))
From: Viktor Dukhovni <ietf-dane@dukhovni.org>
In-Reply-To: <09BDC808C0A7267EFE914CB8@PSB>
Date: Mon, 4 May 2020 15:09:17 -0400
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Reply-To: ietf-smtp@ietf.org
Message-Id: <B938CF5E-A4CF-4BAC-881D-CB8BAE70E560@dukhovni.org>
References: <5EAEDA84.1050408@isdg.net> <09BDC808C0A7267EFE914CB8@PSB>
To: ietf-smtp@ietf.org
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.80.23.2.2)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf-smtp/ceFHiN0o8zNfwMfvSzBuxbH8R1g>
Subject: Re: [ietf-smtp] Valid RFC5322 address
X-BeenThere: ietf-smtp@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Discussion of issues related to Simple Mail Transfer Protocol \(SMTP\) \[RFC 821, RFC 2821, RFC 5321\]" <ietf-smtp.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf-smtp>, <mailto:ietf-smtp-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ietf-smtp/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf-smtp@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-smtp-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-smtp>, <mailto:ietf-smtp-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 04 May 2020 19:09:49 -0000


> On May 3, 2020, at 11:57 AM, John C Klensin <john-ietf@jck.com> wrote:
> 
> You also need to be very careful with the "." following the
> colon.  I haven't looked carefully enough at the syntax today to
> have any confidence how that would be handled with the
> Dot-string production -- you might have to quote the whole
> business to make it valid.

Unquoted "." is only valid in a dot-atom, and so:

	first.last@example.org
	/////.////@example.org

are both OK, but

	"/../"@example.org
	".///"@example.org
	"///."@example.org

all need quoting.  So long as both characters around the "." are "atext",
the "." does not force quoting of a local-part that would not otherwise
require quoting.

In this case, given that the ":" forces quoting, the "." requirements are moot.

-- 
	Viktor.