Re: [EAI] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC6531 (4996)

"Jiankang Yao" <yaojk@cnnic.cn> Tue, 18 April 2017 06:28 UTC

Return-Path: <yaojk@cnnic.cn>
X-Original-To: ima@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ima@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CFEAD128796 for <ima@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 17 Apr 2017 23:28:45 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.902
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.902 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-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 jcg2PPa8POGl for <ima@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 17 Apr 2017 23:28:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from cnnic.cn (smtp13.cnnic.cn [218.241.118.13]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EE8E7129426 for <ima@ietf.org>; Mon, 17 Apr 2017 23:28:40 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from healthyao-PC (unknown [218.241.103.43]) by ocmail02.zx.nicx.cn (Coremail) with SMTP id AQAAf0AJEKTcsfVYNjahKg--.43804S2; Tue, 18 Apr 2017 14:27:59 +0800 (CST)
Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2017 14:27:42 +0800
From: "Jiankang Yao" <yaojk@cnnic.cn>
To: "RFC Errata System" <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org>, "maowei_ietf@cnnic.cn" <maowei_ietf@cnnic.cn>, ben <ben@nostrum.com>, alissa <alissa@cooperw.in>, aamelnikov <aamelnikov@fastmail.fm>, "John C Klensin" <john-ietf@jck.com>, jyee <jyee@afilias.info>
Cc: vitaliy.tokarev <vitaliy.tokarev@gmail.com>, ima <ima@ietf.org>, rfc-editor <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org>
Reply-To: yaojk <yaojk@cnnic.cn>
References: <20170416203054.74AB5B8190E@rfc-editor.org>
X-Priority: 3
X-Has-Attach: no
X-Mailer: Foxmail 7.0.1.92[cn]
Mime-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <2017041814264072046595@cnnic.cn>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_001_NextPart418786645162_=----"
X-CM-TRANSID: AQAAf0AJEKTcsfVYNjahKg--.43804S2
X-Coremail-Antispam: 1UD129KBjvJXoWxXFWrXF1UXF48GF45ury8Krg_yoWrWry3pw sIq39xKryDAr45Gwn2vr1UJr1SqFZYvryUJr1DtFW8Ca9xu3WIgF4xKwn5AFy3urySy345 ZF1jyw1UJFn7ArJanT9S1TB71UUUUU7qnTZGkaVYY2UrUUUUjbIjqfuFe4nvWSU5nxnvy2 9KBjDU0xBIdaVrnRJUUUPFb7Iv0xC_Kw4lb4IE77IF4wAFF20E14v26r4j6ryUM7CY07I2 0VC2zVCF04k26cxKx2IYs7xG6rWj6s0DM7CIcVAFz4kK6r1j6r18M28lY4IEw2IIxxk0rw A2F7IY1VAKz4vEj48ve4kI8wA2z4x0Y4vE2Ix0cI8IcVAFwI0_Xr0_Ar1l84ACjcxK6xII jxv20xvEc7CjxVAFwI0_Cr0_Gr1UM28EF7xvwVC2z280aVAFwI0_GcCE3s1l84ACjcxK6I 8E87Iv6xkF7I0E14v26rxl6s0DM2IYcVAFF20E14v26r1j6r18M2AIxVAIcxkEcVAq07x2 0xvEncxIr21l5I8CrVCF0I0E4I0vr24lYx0E2Ix0cI8IcVAFwI0_Jr0_Jr4lYx0Ex4A2js IE14v26r1j6r4UMcvjeVCFs4IE7xkEbVWUJVW8JwACjcxG0xvY0x0EwIxGrwACY4xI67k0 4243AVAKzVAKj4xxMxkF7I0En4kS14v26r1q6r43MxkIecxEwVAFwVW8AwCF04k20xvY0x 0EwIxGrwCFx2IqxVCFs4IE7xkEbVWUJVW8JwC20s026c02F40E14v26r106r1rMI8I3I0E 7480Y4vE14v26r106r1rMI8E67AF67kF1VAFwI0_Jw0_GFylIxkGc2Ij64vIr41lIxAIcV C0I7IYx2IY67AKxVWUJVWUCwCI42IY6xIIjxv20xvEc7CjxVAFwI0_Jr0_Gr1lIxAIcVCF 04k26cxKx2IYs7xG6rW3Jr0E3s1lIxAIcVC2z280aVAFwI0_Jr0_Gr1lIxAIcVC2z280aV CY1x0267AKxVW8JVW8Jr1l6VACY4xI67k04243AbIYCTnIWIevJa73UjIFyTuYvjxUkBWL DUUUU
X-CM-SenderInfo: x1dryyw6fq0xffof0/
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ima/PxbntvTSCFOvZuu0YOZTr-aZtBY>
Subject: Re: [EAI] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC6531 (4996)
X-BeenThere: ima@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: "EAI \(Email Address Internationalization\)" <ima.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ima>, <mailto:ima-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ima/>
List-Post: <mailto:ima@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ima-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ima>, <mailto:ima-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2017 06:28:46 -0000

Hello all,

   Thanks a lot for Vitaliy V. Tokarev's suggested possible Errata based on the sentence below
"The definition of <atext> is extended to permit both the RFC 5321
definition and a UTF-8 string. That string MUST NOT contain any
of the ASCII graphics or control characters."

My personal feeling is that it might not be an Errata.


The term "UTF-8 string " is used everywhere in EAI RFCs, for examples

1)In section 7.1 RFC6530, which said   " Permits the use of UTF-8 strings in email addresses, both local
      parts and domain names."
2)In section 3.2  RFC6531, which said  "   An SMTP server that announces the SMTPUTF8 extension MUST be prepared
   to accept a UTF-8 string [RFC3629] in any position in which RFC 5321
   specifies that a <mailbox> can appear."


So we have this sentence "The definition of <atext> is extended to permit both the RFC 5321
definition and a UTF-8 string. "
 It means that <atext> allows both RFC 5321 definition and a UTF-8 string.
Since UTF-8 string includes both non-ASCII UTF-8 and ASCII UTF-8, some readers may mis-understand that <atext> can allow some  ASCII graphics or control characters. 
In order to emphasize that  <atext> does not allow any
of the ASCII graphics or control characters, we add this sentence "That string MUST NOT contain any
      of the ASCII graphics or control characters."

Because  "UTF-8 string " is used everywhere in EAI RFCs, in order to avoid the possible misunderstanding,  I remembered that the WG  suggested to add this sentence " That string MUST NOT contain any
of the ASCII graphics or control characters." when discussing this issue.


Since the formal <atext> syntax is clearly defined, I think that this sentence
"The definition of <atext> is extended to permit both the RFC 5321
definition and a UTF-8 string. That string MUST NOT contain any
of the ASCII graphics or control characters." will not cause any problems, and it will help the readers to understand the formal <atext> syntax and avoid the possible misunderstanding.



I hope that this clarification is clear.



Thanks a lot.



Jiankang Yao

From: RFC Errata System
Date: 2017-04-17 04:30
To: yaojk; maowei_ietf; ben; alissa; aamelnikov; john-ietf; jyee
CC: vitaliy.tokarev; ima; rfc-editor
Subject: [Technical Errata Reported] RFC6531 (4996)
The following errata report has been submitted for RFC6531,
"SMTP Extension for Internationalized Email".

--------------------------------------
You may review the report below and at:
http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?rfc=6531&eid=4996

--------------------------------------
Type: Technical
Reported by: Vitaliy V. Tokarev <vitaliy.tokarev@gmail.com>;

Section: 3.3

Original Text
-------------
The definition of <atext> is extended to permit both the RFC 5321
definition and a UTF-8 string. That string MUST NOT contain any
of the ASCII graphics or control characters.

Corrected Text
--------------
The definition of <atext> is extended to permit both the RFC 5321
definition and a UTF-8 string. That string MUST NOT contain any
of the Extended ASCII graphics (%d128-255) or control characters.

Notes
-----
The question is: what is "ASCII graphics characters"? Either meant that is possible to transmit 8bit characters, but they should not be in range %d128-255. Or something else. A better clarification is appreciated.

Instructions:
-------------
This erratum is currently posted as "Reported". If necessary, please
use "Reply All" to discuss whether it should be verified or
rejected. When a decision is reached, the verifying party  
can log in to change the status and edit the report, if necessary. 

--------------------------------------
RFC6531 (draft-ietf-eai-rfc5336bis-16)
--------------------------------------
Title               : SMTP Extension for Internationalized Email
Publication Date    : February 2012
Author(s)           : J. Yao, W. Mao
Category            : PROPOSED STANDARD
Source              : Email Address Internationalization
Area                : Applications
Stream              : IETF
Verifying Party     : IESG