Re: [regext] Internationalized Email Addresses and EPP

Dmitry Belyavsky <beldmit@gmail.com> Mon, 23 November 2020 15:00 UTC

Return-Path: <beldmit@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: regext@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: regext@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 178993A0E6B for <regext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 23 Nov 2020 07:00:30 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.197
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.197 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.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 b54hF1EPI8jb for <regext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 23 Nov 2020 07:00:27 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-ed1-x52f.google.com (mail-ed1-x52f.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::52f]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0D2653A0E67 for <regext@ietf.org>; Mon, 23 Nov 2020 07:00:27 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-ed1-x52f.google.com with SMTP id t9so17398461edq.8 for <regext@ietf.org>; Mon, 23 Nov 2020 07:00:26 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=WZFenLHwgMYAhKginxW8vwQUDiPeu2xVXXVFc/wU8L8=; b=pBIqmI7P5+rM2hNHzAxJuLPnwvQXGOO0OhO+n7j5nMJBbmM2QLcHgH6dLc0GNZyCcd AidO6A28PIXSt9PCTQfbGEWWZ3Y/w92pegKLhknuIFT+pa5ZGDYHYFXQfdb2HqUTA+1s XdPul8StZgZnwNJ9cuwh0bpad7unvhJI/AmRb+nk3IteiY84lf++5Hh3N2RfXdsMsBOq vfTHSQBmdewqIOZL5q0Oh9NkUplDIKpqXfpBMBCwU6IyRb61kjOxyCBATea4/fXreWIx JlK7UtQy7smxwtBzYsC9C4CjWaWILCLoKYfUeYX4Gg77eW8Qu/goIx/XGato1hwql5Bb FKHw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=WZFenLHwgMYAhKginxW8vwQUDiPeu2xVXXVFc/wU8L8=; b=rdQS4NEFUa7fZPnsuJaV3ElnwW0EqMFC64VnDFVmH9yD3+Zpva7yeFI9d57qez/4su V34jqk/LPtnHD1fSu1rd5IPGNh2OOT4bCeehfv668cQv7RRnrqqybx7Pg6jT92Gc4jyi kLW8RXdNvmj0lc9axB1DdZ3bH1pgauUvUs+3hPRLO7vs5mTEVd0VAkWAM6A1hAoEKet9 Wr8Y9vXAPEWGIUK7eEickSc2h5oMlp6L77/kwTSAbgTOcpJsTcWVJs4SNhNKasX/vf85 5ILKxeaUD2gTtHj2rlWJTZviacdN92hOnBU4SidF+OnBwQc1jHGqA+MPps/hsyvOaqmJ xxbw==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM5326U6FEM4aB2eiklNEm+7DIeLiDk80LEgy3Pj3p+ArnY9o4lGEy l0PpgaVue0bx8yjyjGBmHdnpG4HS+3nr8wdw2Kc=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwGe1vG8qrVemPl/kYF6alDswQwtfxCzW0GyuCcAkuepkC9Z+qt1D4bQ4tvEINLkfdZjyZFo8Xrd16sQxHUz5g=
X-Received: by 2002:aa7:df89:: with SMTP id b9mr48476773edy.335.1606143625515; Mon, 23 Nov 2020 07:00:25 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <C9EBEF19-55C1-4C5E-87BC-894FBF7439FF@verisign.com> <CAHXf=0p5F1LsUYoeX_mRNvuKNpeOvWufY0tNL9zNn+6Zj0cR1A@mail.gmail.com> <3d6ce5fd7d1e482fb3df168e0d26c0a0@verisign.com>
In-Reply-To: <3d6ce5fd7d1e482fb3df168e0d26c0a0@verisign.com>
From: Dmitry Belyavsky <beldmit@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 23 Nov 2020 18:00:14 +0300
Message-ID: <CADqLbzJC593jbno93Uc2zc1uM65TuN4YXgj5wzeZzhW2GmxDMg@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Hollenbeck, Scott" <shollenbeck=40verisign.com@dmarc.ietf.org>
Cc: "alex.mayrhofer.ietf@gmail.com" <alex.mayrhofer.ietf@gmail.com>, "Gould, James" <jgould@verisign.com>, "regext@ietf.org" <regext@ietf.org>, "Klaus.Malorny@knipp.de" <Klaus.Malorny@knipp.de>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000041d71505b4c77453"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/regext/bSoJ03A0Z06Hw2ft1YMld1nH03s>
Subject: Re: [regext] Internationalized Email Addresses and EPP
X-BeenThere: regext@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Registration Protocols Extensions <regext.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/regext>, <mailto:regext-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/regext/>
List-Post: <mailto:regext@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:regext-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/regext>, <mailto:regext-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 23 Nov 2020 15:00:30 -0000

Dear Scott,

On Mon, Nov 23, 2020 at 4:59 PM Hollenbeck, Scott <shollenbeck=
40verisign.com@dmarc.ietf.org> wrote:

> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Alexander Mayrhofer <alex.mayrhofer.ietf@gmail.com>
> > Sent: Monday, November 23, 2020 1:04 AM
> > To: Gould, James <jgould@verisign.com>
> > Cc: Klaus.Malorny@knipp.de; Hollenbeck, Scott
> > <shollenbeck@verisign.com>om>; regext@ietf.org
> > Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [regext] Internationalized Email Addresses and
> EPP
> >
> > Caution: This email originated from outside the organization. Do not
> click links
> > or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content
> > is safe.
> >
> > Jumping into this discussion quite late, but...
> >
> > On Thu, Nov 19, 2020 at 4:39 PM Gould, James
> > <jgould=40verisign.com@dmarc.ietf.org> wrote:
> >
> > > The 3 options presented and discussed at the REGEXT meeting included
> > three extension options, which all include an namespace URI in the
> greeting
> > and logic services:
> >
> > I'd really like to understand why there's not option (4), which, as i
> > mentioned, would be:
> >
> > - Accept EAI addresses like any other email address in the standard EPP
> field
> > (if the registry supports this). I don't see why the current RFC 5730 ff
> schema
> > would not support this.
> > - If a registry doesn't want to accept EAI addresses, return a 2306.
> > This is inline with many other elements of registry policies - eg.
> > when a registry validates the pc element of contacts against local
> policy, it
> > would also 2306 - and nobody has yet discussed an extension for the
> purpose
> > of announcing that the registry only supports a certain set of pc values
> > (nooooo, no i've planted ideas in all of our
> > brains!)
> > - I don't see an issue with RDAP. RDAP can perfectly display non-ASCII
> > characters
> > - Creating an extension like this will never make EAI's "first class
> citizens".
> > Accepting EAIs in standard "<email>" elements will.
> >
> > Maybe I'm failing to see the point.  And, as Klaus said, we're making EPP
> > based registries a super complicated beast, implemented by a very small
> > community. Introducing "yet another switch" into the protocol won't make
> it
> > easier.
>
> This may be the path of least resistance. I'm still trying to think
> through hat would happen if a registry returns an internationalized email
> address to a registrar that doesn't expect one. This could happen after a
> domain transfer, for example. Is this a problem? If not, maybe we could
> just get by without any other protocol changes or extensions.
>

>From my point of view, if the registry has implemented EAI support, all the
registrars will have to do it. They should deal with the clients with such
emails _somehow_.
E.g., they hardly can reject the transfer relying on this reason.


>
> > For example, what would an "old" client do that doesn't understand a
> > potential EAI extension? Would they be deprived of email addresses
> > completely, and receive non-sensical placeholders which they'd
> unwittingly
> > hand over to their email system (even if that email system would
> perfectly
> > understand EAIs?). Does sound like a failed opportunity to me!
>
> See question above.
>
> Scott
> _______________________________________________
> regext mailing list
> regext@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/regext
>


-- 
SY, Dmitry Belyavsky