Re: [EAI] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC6532 (6036)

ned+ima@mrochek.com Wed, 01 April 2020 18:17 UTC

Return-Path: <ned+ima@mrochek.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 D6AEE3A15B4 for <ima@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 1 Apr 2020 11:17:17 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.099
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.099 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=mrochek.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 ADgmwUc5YWWR for <ima@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 1 Apr 2020 11:17:16 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from plum.mrochek.com (plum.mrochek.com [172.95.64.195]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 547BE3A15B5 for <ima@ietf.org>; Wed, 1 Apr 2020 11:17:16 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from dkim-sign.mauve.mrochek.com by mauve.mrochek.com (PMDF V6.1-1 #35243) id <01RJ6VTI1QXC0058Z6@mauve.mrochek.com> for ima@ietf.org; Wed, 1 Apr 2020 11:16:00 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=mrochek.com; s=201712; t=1585764960; bh=2kCcQeytb73NG9d8170cYQrKZeEYLsIoFle9YpP/T5s=; h=From:Cc:Date:Subject:In-reply-to:References:To:From; b=nfQzmAiVM7DvO6NUXzS1yZAxPTSes/IKE4YuhIGctvJ7Zkm0S5u+Lq7x7ycPGvQ3e abOjgThrl61Iw83XzfmUjX1kgcvwrem67gGYpkAkeiwM+oKAnSh1SCsIAmsIW/5nRD 3flGTDRq02/MN1sqJyPdypAQdMOG9DUKJaWN7lk4=
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Content-type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=us-ascii
Received: from mauve.mrochek.com by mauve.mrochek.com (PMDF V6.1-1 #35243) id <01RIHLDFQH34000058@mauve.mrochek.com> (original mail from NED@mauve.mrochek.com) for ima@ietf.org; Wed, 1 Apr 2020 11:15:54 -0700 (PDT)
From: ned+ima@mrochek.com
Cc: RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org>, abelyang@twnic.net.tw, Shawn.Steele@microsoft.com, ned+ietf@mrochek.com, ben@nostrum.com, aamelnikov@fastmail.fm, adam@nostrum.com, jyee@afilias.info, ima@ietf.org, vesely@tana.it
Message-id: <01RJ6VTFO7SQ000058@mauve.mrochek.com>
Date: Wed, 01 Apr 2020 11:14:49 -0700 (PDT)
In-reply-to: "Your message dated Wed, 01 Apr 2020 13:04:47 -0400" <6D9862819E9E4071B83CC6D5@PSB>
References: <20200401083756.5D051F40723@rfc-editor.org> <6D9862819E9E4071B83CC6D5@PSB>
To: John C Klensin <john-ietf@jck.com>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ima/qdyjxDh0CMKA8tX58agN47oa7B4>
Subject: Re: [EAI] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC6532 (6036)
X-BeenThere: ima@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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: Wed, 01 Apr 2020 18:17:18 -0000

Your recollection is correct and so is your point about this being
a fundamental change to SMTPUTF8. There was a strong consensus that
parameter names didn't need to be internationalized.

				Ned

> My vague recollection is that this was an explicit decision by
> the WG.   Essentially, just as the WG concluded that header
> field names should remain restricted to ASCII, the conclusion
> was that Content-type fields were protocol parameters, not
> information for the user, and that there was no need (and
> potentially some cost and risks) to allow non-ASCII characters
> or free text more generally.  One could revisit that question,
> but I believe that the appropriate way to do it would be to
> generate an Internet draft that explained the issues and
> tradeoffs and proposed a change -- not just to RFC 6532 but to
> the IANA registries related to Content-type parameter values.

> In any event not something that is possible as a erratum because
> the change would change the technical requirements for an
> SMTPUTF8 implementation.

> best,
>   john


> --On Wednesday, April 1, 2020 01:37 -0700 RFC Errata System
> <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org> wrote:

> > The following errata report has been submitted for RFC6532,
> > "Internationalized Email Headers".
> >
> > --------------------------------------
> > You may review the report below and at:
> > https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata/eid6036
> >
> > --------------------------------------
> > Type: Technical
> > Reported by: Alessandro Vesely <vesely@tana.it>
> >
> > Section: GLOBAL
> >
> > Original Text
> > -------------
> > A section 3.2bis, "Syntax Extensions to RFC 2045", is missing.
> >
> >
> > Corrected Text
> > --------------
> > In particular, Section 5.1 of RFC 2045, "Syntax of the
> > Content-Type Header Field", deserves an extension:
> >
> >     token /= UTF8-non-ascii
> >
> > similar to the extensions given to various text types given in
> > Section 3.2.
> >
> > Notes
> > -----
> > Various header fields are defined in terms of the grammar
> > defined in RFC 2045.  In particular, the missing extension of
> > token was reported for Authentication-Results:
> > https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dmarc/g1U__axJW5I6OenEuw
> > D48nwptzU
> >
> > 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.
> >
> > --------------------------------------
> > RFC6532 (draft-ietf-eai-rfc5335bis-13)
> > --------------------------------------
> > Title               : Internationalized Email Headers
> > Publication Date    : February 2012
> > Author(s)           : A. Yang, S. Steele, N. Freed
> > Category            : PROPOSED STANDARD
> > Source              : Email Address Internationalization
> > Area                : Applications
> > Stream              : IETF
> > Verifying Party     : IESG


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