Re: [Tools-discuss] emails being truncated

John C Klensin <john-ietf@jck.com> Thu, 22 July 2021 13:15 UTC

Return-Path: <john-ietf@jck.com>
X-Original-To: tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B81DE3A4608 for <tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 22 Jul 2021 06:15:18 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.896
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.896 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=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 AkZ46SXlhLGB for <tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 22 Jul 2021 06:15:14 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from bsa2.jck.com (ns.jck.com [70.88.254.51]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7A54A3A4610 for <tools-discuss@ietf.org>; Thu, 22 Jul 2021 06:15:14 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [198.252.137.10] (helo=PSB) by bsa2.jck.com with esmtp (Exim 4.82 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from <john-ietf@jck.com>) id 1m6YXb-000ATw-Pf; Thu, 22 Jul 2021 09:15:07 -0400
Date: Thu, 22 Jul 2021 09:15:02 -0400
From: John C Klensin <john-ietf@jck.com>
To: 'Toerless Eckert' <tte@cs.fau.de>, "STARK, BARBARA H" <bs7652@att.com>, glen@amsl.com
cc: "'tools-discuss@ietf.org'" <tools-discuss@ietf.org>
Message-ID: <6F183CB68B6F420768E912FB@PSB>
In-Reply-To: <20210721165527.GP57276@faui48e.informatik.uni-erlangen.de>
References: <DM6PR02MB692463A7818126FD5CD2820FC3119@DM6PR02MB6924.namprd02.prod.outlook.com> <20210716161105.GM24216@faui48e.informatik.uni-erlangen.de> <DM6PR02MB6924E161BADFE55363DE4C03C3E39@DM6PR02MB6924.namprd02.prod.outlook.com> <20210721165527.GP57276@faui48e.informatik.uni-erlangen.de>
X-Mailer: Mulberry/4.0.8 (Win32)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 198.252.137.10
X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: john-ietf@jck.com
X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on bsa2.jck.com); SAEximRunCond expanded to false
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tools-discuss/6brE8Xy8TYs9okoA_Jk0ZfsYGms>
Subject: Re: [Tools-discuss] emails being truncated
X-BeenThere: tools-discuss@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF Tools Discussion <tools-discuss.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/tools-discuss>, <mailto:tools-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/tools-discuss/>
List-Post: <mailto:tools-discuss@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:tools-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tools-discuss>, <mailto:tools-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 22 Jul 2021 13:15:19 -0000


--On Wednesday, July 21, 2021 18:55 +0200 'Toerless Eckert'
<tte@cs.fau.de> wrote:

>...
> The only SMTP server/message-receiver side issue i can think
> of is confusion introduced when going beyond ASCII about what
> constitutes a ".". RFC5321 hints at this, but does not explain
> the breaking workflow.

In what way do you consider the text in RFC6321 a "hint"?  Is it
because the text refers to "period" and, in several places, to
"<CRLF>.<CRFL>" without spelling out that the period is ASCII
(2/14 in the original notation, Hex 2E)?    Are the restrictions
to ASCII in Section 2.3.1 insufficient?

Because RFC 5321 is being revised in the EMAILCORE WG (where you
are welcome to bring this up if you think it is important), it
is quite easy to add the hex value to the "(period or full
stop)" note  in Section 3.3.  Would that be sufficient to make
the text more than a hint, or it just being ridiculously
pedantic?

   john