Re: [EAI] I-D Action: draft-ietf-eai-rfc5336bis-11.txt

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Chris Newman" <chris.newman@oracle.com>
To: "Joseph Yee" <jyee@afilias.info>
Cc: <ima@ietf.org>; "Jiankang Yao" <healthyao@gmail.com>
Sent: Thursday, August 04, 2011 7:17 AM
Subject: Re: [EAI] I-D Action: draft-ietf-eai-rfc5336bis-11.txt

> --On August 3, 2011 14:44:06 -0400 Joseph Yee <jyee@afilias.info> wrote:
>> On 2011-07-26, at 9:57 AM, Chris Newman wrote:
>>
>>> --On July 26, 2011 19:51:37 +0800 Jiankang Yao <healthyao@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>>> 1. Somewhere this needs to say: If a server advertises both UTF8SMTPbis
>>>>> and  DSN, then that server MUST support UTF-8 in the ORCPT parameter.
>>>>> This also  has ABNF impact.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> my concern is that, if we choose to add the sentence above we cause
>>>> another problems.
>>>>
>>>> Is it really necessary to add such a sentence?
>>>
>>> Yes.
>>>
>>> Without this sentence, a server can implement old DSN and be compliant
>>> with the old DSN spec and implement UTF8SMTPbis and be compliant with
>>> rfc5336bis, and not support UTF-8 in ORCPT. Such a server will break
>>> interoperability with clients that are compliant with 4952bis which
>>> requires this behavior.
>>
>> I believed that RFC5337bis (section 3) covered this already.  Maybe just
>> need to add text to reference RFC5337bis.
> 
> Rules in RFC 5337bis do not impact RFC 5336bis implementations, unless RFC 
> 5336bis explicitly states that implementations MUST follow that rule (or 
> all rules) in RFC 5337bis.
> 

in the end of  section  3.2.  The UTF8SMTPbis Extension

how about adding one sentence below?

If the UTF8SMTPbis-aware SMTP servers try to support DSN[RFC 3461] , they MUST support 
RFC5337bis.

does such sentence satisify your expectation?

Jiankang Yao

> - Chris
> 
> _______________________________________________
> IMA mailing list
> IMA@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ima