IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [EAI] [IETF] Content Issues [

Shawn Steele <Shawn.Steele@microsoft.com> Sun, 16 October 2016 01:00 UTC

Return-Path: <Shawn.Steele@microsoft.com>
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 F15A21294AC for <ima@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 15 Oct 2016 18:00:35 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.104
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.104 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_20=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=microsoft.com
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 P4o8Z5TBMZiz for <ima@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 15 Oct 2016 18:00:34 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from NAM03-BY2-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-by2nam03on0104.outbound.protection.outlook.com [104.47.42.104]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 97821129493 for <ima@ietf.org>; Sat, 15 Oct 2016 18:00:34 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=selector1; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version; bh=wpfbvVI4Gw1AHX8EqmpBvycFDYXPJ1tKWdTfW++hCPM=; b=EsSSew+kV2bStb6hNnBGM2ZIlsLuJ5dyuDXGx0f0OZkzjq872Krgy9O7Jdfb/8FzxVsHHiZKKXvkLhrG15PbQiC9kqIISsxAdoDt8v5VxRQkus7757KdEt9W9mR0GbCkkw+KhEnMrj0iqwonhlscaDajvZFe97i8Sk5qjq7TTnU=
Received: from MWHPR03MB2813.namprd03.prod.outlook.com (10.175.135.7) by MWHPR03MB2813.namprd03.prod.outlook.com (10.175.135.7) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_CBC_SHA384_P384) id 15.1.659.11; Sun, 16 Oct 2016 01:00:33 +0000
Received: from MWHPR03MB2813.namprd03.prod.outlook.com ([10.175.135.7]) by MWHPR03MB2813.namprd03.prod.outlook.com ([10.175.135.7]) with mapi id 15.01.0659.025; Sun, 16 Oct 2016 01:00:33 +0000
From: Shawn Steele <Shawn.Steele@microsoft.com>
To: "ima@ietf.org" <ima@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [IETF] Content Issues [
Thread-Index: AdInSGoNlaqwg5dxQCSUup0Iyls68g==
Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2016 01:00:33 +0000
Message-ID: <MWHPR03MB281341141A1CE0C0895F58A482D10@MWHPR03MB2813.namprd03.prod.outlook.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
authentication-results: spf=none (sender IP is ) smtp.mailfrom=Shawn.Steele@microsoft.com;
x-originating-ip: [50.35.76.48]
x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: a22cb50d-6f41-4417-1e5f-08d3f55fd556
x-microsoft-exchange-diagnostics: 1; MWHPR03MB2813; 7:Zm8QycjmHAR/wj6wsCPnxeD9dUQZyZnlm5sbWaF8Ip8mMOclsA2WWy7RSxoXbrLVi2/cc0NcFsf6MSms9qxaEPOHhfusi5J02HJIhbnQzad0vsVrMd8aZiT9yUepojJORKsCEwxihCc6QuMr9H9JH0VbObGoC5eiaM2cb6zPphdLsW+zzCthrhHMPXf/jBiyhFb/a+uZUM+C5qF/raeri4vHhwcAXmnUXqwGzg42Ml3JP897nNU9IXoIuMgfe2jHKYz9LYxPu4E8b3Ue+Cc15G7N9IL6/Va/zDsMK+RKk4SqgMfk7407HMVWkApRwqPsOGT1+K2ti40q2LkxD07iYYAXhWnuTvV5fzLAvhD5MF0hs93t0Ogy3Mfvse0Pnb81
x-microsoft-antispam: UriScan:;BCL:0;PCL:0;RULEID:;SRVR:MWHPR03MB2813;
x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: <MWHPR03MB2813B8792FE86AAD4CF8C5F782D10@MWHPR03MB2813.namprd03.prod.outlook.com>
x-exchange-antispam-report-test: UriScan:;
x-exchange-antispam-report-cfa-test: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(61425038)(6040176)(601004)(2401047)(5005006)(8121501046)(10201501046)(3002001)(6055026)(61426038)(61427038); SRVR:MWHPR03MB2813; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:; SRVR:MWHPR03MB2813;
x-forefront-prvs: 00979FCB3A
x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10019020)(6009001)(7916002)(199003)(189002)(97736004)(19580405001)(5640700001)(6916009)(305945005)(7846002)(2501003)(74316002)(11100500001)(2906002)(68736007)(33656002)(10290500002)(105586002)(7736002)(76576001)(7696004)(8990500004)(99286002)(107886002)(122556002)(2351001)(8936002)(54356999)(50986999)(586003)(101416001)(189998001)(106356001)(450100001)(77096005)(92566002)(5005710100001)(10400500002)(66066001)(3280700002)(81156014)(81166006)(5002640100001)(3660700001)(9686002)(110136003)(87936001)(2900100001)(102836003)(5660300001)(10090500001)(1730700003)(6116002)(8676002)(3846002)(86362001)(86612001); DIR:OUT; SFP:1102; SCL:1; SRVR:MWHPR03MB2813; H:MWHPR03MB2813.namprd03.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; PTR:InfoNoRecords; A:1; MX:1; LANG:en;
received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: microsoft.com does not designate permitted sender hosts)
spamdiagnosticoutput: 1:99
spamdiagnosticmetadata: NSPM
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-OriginatorOrg: microsoft.com
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 16 Oct 2016 01:00:33.5507 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 72f988bf-86f1-41af-91ab-2d7cd011db47
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: MWHPR03MB2813
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ima/VmMOAt1g_TGJHFxuvRDC8nsQiGA>
Subject: Re: [EAI] [IETF] Content Issues [
X-BeenThere: ima@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
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: Sun, 16 Oct 2016 01:00:36 -0000

> Seriously, at least in the near term, I'd oppose letting anyone post to an IETF list from a non-ASCII address.  This has been discussed before in other contexts, but it is important that we, as a standards body, be able to identify who is posting to our lists and trying to influence outcomes. 

I'm confused because I don't see how EAI addresses would be less accountable than ASCII addresses.  Sure, they might be less readable, but surely people could have JohnDoe@SpecialServer.whatever and we'd have no clue who they "really" were.

I'd vote for "eat our own dogfood"

-Shawn

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email