Re: [EAI] I-D Action: draft-ietf-eai-mailinglistbis-00.txt

On 2011/11/26 14:14, John Levine wrote:
>
>>>> Where does using a percent-encoded instead of a punycoded
>>>> <ihost>  help wrt mailing lists?  So far I think you can
>>>> either keep UTF-8 "as is" or "get it right" (= 3987 + 5890).
>>>
>>> I still prefer to let other people weigh in on this.
>
> I went back and looked at that section again.  (Excuse: it's from
> Randy's old draft.)  The sentence in question says:
>
>    Note that discussion on whether internationalized domain names
>    should be percent-encoded or puny-coded, is ongoing; see<xref
>    target="I-D.duerst-iri-bis" />.

Why not just point to RFC 3986, last two paragraphs of section 3.2.2 
(http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3986#section-3.2.2)?

That's an Internet Standard rather than an "ongoing discussion".

Regards,    Martin.

> In relation to ASCII mail, it's probably worth pointing out that a few
> characters, notably percent and exclamation point, have been used for
> routing hacks, and it's still risky to use them in e-mail addresses.
> Do we think those characters will still be risky in EAI mail?  If so,
> is this the right place to mention it?
>
> I'm thinking of rewriting the section on List-* headers just to say
> that the specs for encoding UTF-8 into URLs are in flux, so even in
> EAI mail, it may be a challenge to create non-ASCII List-* headers
> that interoperate reliably.  How's that?
>
> Although I think that John K's \U'abcd' looks reasonable, this draft
> is currently limited to describing the problems rather than guessing
> how to deal with them, so it doesn't seem appropriate to mention it.
>
> R's,
> John
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> IMA mailing list
> IMA@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ima
>