Re: Review of draft-kucherawy-dmarc-base-04

[Pete Resnick <[e-mail]>]

On 4/23/14 1:40 PM, Dave Crocker wrote:
> On 4/23/2014 11:28 AM, Pete Resnick wrote:
>> On 4/23/14 12:35 PM, Dave Crocker wrote:
>>> On 4/22/2014 5:30 PM, Martin Rex wrote:
>>>> RFC5322.From might contain no DNS domain to begin with.
>>> So a From: field address with no domain name has never been valid for
>>> "Internet" email.
>>
>> Well, except http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6854
>
> You seem to be saying that that doc counters my assertion.
>
> This is a classic example of the problem with such a generic pointer: 
> it leaves the reader to search through the document to find the 
> essential bit of text.  And alas in my case, I failed.
>
> I do not see anything in that doc that makes it valid to have a From 
> field with no domain name.

Sorry for being obscure. 6854 says:

    from = "From:" (mailbox-list / address-list) CRLF

And from 5322:

    address-list    =   (address *("," address)) / obs-addr-list
    mailbox-list    =   (mailbox *("," mailbox)) / obs-mbox-list
    address         =   mailbox / group
    mailbox         =   name-addr / addr-spec
    name-addr       =   [display-name] angle-addr
    angle-addr      =   [CFWS] "<" addr-spec ">" [CFWS] /
                        obs-angle-addr
    group           =   display-name ":" [group-list] ";" [CFWS]
    display-name    =   phrase

Which makes the following legal (from the examples in 6854):

       From: Nightly Monitor Robot:;

pr

-- 
Pete Resnick<http://www.qualcomm.com/~presnick/>
Qualcomm Technologies, Inc. - [phone]