From hmdmhdfmhdjmzdtjmzdtzktdkztdjz@gmail.com Wed Sep 7 04:25:04 2011 Return-Path: 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 65DA021F8B3D for ; Wed, 7 Sep 2011 04:25:04 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.803 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.803 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.004, BAYES_00=-2.599, FROM_LOCAL_NOVOWEL=0.5, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id m9cLIW7WyerA for ; Wed, 7 Sep 2011 04:25:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-pz0-f45.google.com (mail-pz0-f45.google.com [209.85.210.45]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D379621F8B3A for ; Wed, 7 Sep 2011 04:25:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: by pzk33 with SMTP id 33so18114126pzk.18 for ; Wed, 07 Sep 2011 04:26:53 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to:cc:content-type; bh=Cy7nY2+l3cu2G7w6Z9zTGTfq9ufmH3S8XA92S9sMoq0=; b=cBBWEbjtG379cchHEWJz2uorbbRtmHRFnV5NQ7N59rFWn9Y161IO+/ATg0tEPl9uos uRwKVBFSVPla6Ry8IBIgFIGdSiszH9cMnBrHHvawBPngTxBkJ35in/1RI9YZVp5BOP6u gHdR18J7mRnSI+9pG9dhs5az78NQc1uXcUJOE= Received: by 10.68.22.2 with SMTP id z2mr12601026pbe.515.1315394813067; Wed, 07 Sep 2011 04:26:53 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.142.101.15 with HTTP; Wed, 7 Sep 2011 04:26:13 -0700 (PDT) From: Frank Ellermann Date: Wed, 7 Sep 2011 13:26:13 +0200 Message-ID: To: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Martin_J=2E_D=FCrst?= Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Cc: ima@ietf.org Subject: Re: [EAI] I-D Action: draft-duerst-eai-mailto-01.txt X-BeenThere: ima@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: "EAI \(Email Address Internationalization\)" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 07 Sep 2011 11:25:04 -0000 Hi, draft-duerst-eai-mailto intends to obsolete RFC 6068, I'll use 6068bis as a shorthand. In section 2 you write that excludes the RFC 5322 . I think you actually exclude *and* , i.e., (1) you get rid of any or in by directly using "[" *dtext-no-obs "]" (2) you get rid of any or in any on both sides by directly using an encoded with the name (3) somehow avoids the before and after , and it avoids within Points (1) and (2) already solve all CFWS issues in syntax. For (3) this is also possible: As for (1) define a new excluding and . After that 6068bis can improve what might be a subtle bug in RFC 6068 1.3. While there is no CFWS or FWS in mailto: URIs, a space in a is okay, but of course it has to be encoded: mailto:%22joe%5C%20blogger%22@example The last example in section 6.2 already covered that, but a less convoluted example might be clearer, "joe\ blogger"@example (ok.), "joe blogger"@example (bad). If the latter is really "bad" in RFC 5322, section 3.2.4 can be improved in 5322bis. But it is certainly "bad" in 6068 and 6068bis, no matter what 5322 says or doesn't say. The idnits tool wants a fresher boilerplate, that could be about s/BSD/simplified BSD/. Please insert the four lost spaces in the last line of again. Looking at the diff you replaced most (but not all) URI by URI/IRI. That is rather ugly, why not limit the IRI stuff to the i18n section and the introduction, and then focus on URIs as it was? Please split section 2 in three parts: The syntax, 2.1 for prose affecting , 2.2 for prose: The last statement about "#" in (= proposed 2.2) also affects any "#" in (= proposed 2.1), without these sub-sections that is not completely obvious. It would be also clearer to move some prose to 2.2, where it does not affect , e.g., I think that "&", ";", and "=" do not need to be percent-encoded before the query part (= outside of ). There is no in mailto: URIs, please add "/" and "?" to (= does not require percent-encoding). OTOH I fear that a "@" within MUST be encoded. The encoding requirements in 2.1 and 2.2 should be slightly different and discussed separately. The use of instead of for some 5332 terms is a very good idea. -Frank From jyee@afilias.info Wed Sep 14 05:41:21 2011 Return-Path: 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 2F50921F8BF9 for ; Wed, 14 Sep 2011 05:41:21 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -5.444 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.444 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.821, BAYES_05=-1.11, IP_NOT_FRIENDLY=0.334, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, SARE_SUB_ENC_UTF8=0.152] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Ib1YVBnuhlLU for ; Wed, 14 Sep 2011 05:41:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: from outbound.afilias.info (outbound.afilias.info [69.46.124.26]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id ABD5F21F8BEE for ; Wed, 14 Sep 2011 05:41:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ms5.yyz2.afilias-ops.info ([10.50.129.111] helo=smtp.afilias.info) by outbound.afilias.info with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1R3ooK-0002Hb-90 for ima@ietf.org; Wed, 14 Sep 2011 12:43:28 +0000 Received: from mail-qy0-f178.google.com ([209.85.216.178]) by smtp.afilias.info with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1R3ooK-0001sj-5C for ima@ietf.org; Wed, 14 Sep 2011 12:43:28 +0000 Received: by qyg14 with SMTP id 14so1731460qyg.9 for ; Wed, 14 Sep 2011 05:43:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.229.68.227 with SMTP id w35mr2090913qci.125.1316004207824; Wed, 14 Sep 2011 05:43:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.0.103] (76-10-164-182.dsl.teksavvy.com. [76.10.164.182]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id hc3sm7992qab.22.2011.09.14.05.43.26 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Wed, 14 Sep 2011 05:43:27 -0700 (PDT) From: Joseph Yee Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Wed, 14 Sep 2011 08:43:25 -0400 To: "ima@ietf.org WG" Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1084) X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1084) Subject: [EAI] UTF-8 in Message-IDs consensus X-BeenThere: ima@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: "EAI \(Email Address Internationalization\)" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 14 Sep 2011 12:41:21 -0000 All, Below are consensus statement following the discussion thread UTF-8 in = Message-IDs whether allowing UTF-8 or not: Message-ID can contain UTF-8 encodings in both formal syntax (ABNF) and = general text. ---- Some note and observation (1) There may be hiccups during transition period, but no convincing = cases demonstrating Internet or Email will be "broken badly" (2) With encouragement of using domain as value of id-right in practice, = the WG majority preference (from past discussion, not just the email = thread mentioned above) is using U-label rather than A-label (3) Regarding the concern of leak, maybe we want to add some RECOMMEND = text for MAIL FROM (or EAI capable MTA) check? [personal opinion] (4) The "SHOULD NOT use ASCII" could be used in advice doc explaining = the advantage of being more conservative [this is personal opinion, not = as chair] =20 ---- Again, sorry that I can't send this early enough. Thanks Joseph= From tony@att.com Wed Sep 14 06:04:29 2011 Return-Path: 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 69B6A21F8C9B for ; Wed, 14 Sep 2011 06:04:29 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -106.197 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.197 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.250, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, SARE_SUB_ENC_UTF8=0.152, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id dnNPxGY1fG5D for ; Wed, 14 Sep 2011 06:04:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail120.messagelabs.com (mail120.messagelabs.com [216.82.250.83]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6A9A721F8C99 for ; Wed, 14 Sep 2011 06:04:28 -0700 (PDT) X-Env-Sender: tony@att.com X-Msg-Ref: server-9.tower-120.messagelabs.com!1316005595!38002595!1 X-Originating-IP: [144.160.20.145] X-StarScan-Version: 6.3.6; banners=-,-,- X-VirusChecked: Checked Received: (qmail 4661 invoked from network); 14 Sep 2011 13:06:36 -0000 Received: from sbcsmtp6.sbc.com (HELO mlpd192.enaf.sfdc.sbc.com) (144.160.20.145) by server-9.tower-120.messagelabs.com with DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA encrypted SMTP; 14 Sep 2011 13:06:36 -0000 Received: from enaf.sfdc.sbc.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by mlpd192.enaf.sfdc.sbc.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id p8ED71rY031912 for ; Wed, 14 Sep 2011 09:07:01 -0400 Received: from alpd052.aldc.att.com (alpd052.aldc.att.com [130.8.42.31]) by mlpd192.enaf.sfdc.sbc.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id p8ED6wgw031840 for ; Wed, 14 Sep 2011 09:06:58 -0400 Received: from aldc.att.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by alpd052.aldc.att.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id p8ED6VgQ011031 for ; Wed, 14 Sep 2011 09:06:31 -0400 Received: from dns.maillennium.att.com (mailgw1.maillennium.att.com [135.25.114.99]) by alpd052.aldc.att.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id p8ED6Pd1010875 for ; Wed, 14 Sep 2011 09:06:25 -0400 Received: from [135.70.54.253] (vpn-135-70-54-253.vpn.west.att.com[135.70.54.253]) by maillennium.att.com (mailgw1) with ESMTP id <20110914130619gw100e4lhje> (Authid: tony); Wed, 14 Sep 2011 13:06:21 +0000 X-Originating-IP: [135.70.54.253] Message-ID: <4E70A6A5.2090905@att.com> Date: Wed, 14 Sep 2011 09:05:41 -0400 From: Tony Hansen User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.0; rv:6.0) Gecko/20110812 Thunderbird/6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Joseph Yee References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: "ima@ietf.org WG" Subject: Re: [EAI] UTF-8 in Message-IDs consensus X-BeenThere: ima@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: "EAI \(Email Address Internationalization\)" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 14 Sep 2011 13:04:29 -0000 On 9/14/2011 8:43 AM, Joseph Yee wrote: > All, > > Below are consensus statement following the discussion thread UTF-8 in Message-IDs whether allowing UTF-8 or not: > > Message-ID can contain UTF-8 encodings in both formal syntax (ABNF) and general text. > > ---- > Some note and observation > (1) There may be hiccups during transition period, but no convincing cases demonstrating Internet or Email will be "broken badly" > (2) With encouragement of using domain as value of id-right in practice, the WG majority preference (from past discussion, not just the email thread mentioned above) is using U-label rather than A-label > (3) Regarding the concern of leak, maybe we want to add some RECOMMEND text for MAIL FROM (or EAI capable MTA) check? [personal opinion] > (4) The "SHOULD NOT use ASCII" could be used in advice doc explaining the advantage of being more conservative [this is personal opinion, not as chair] Did you get #4 wrong? Is that supposed to read SHOULD NOT use UTF-8 ? Tony Hansen > ---- > > > Again, sorry that I can't send this early enough. From joseph.yee@gmail.com Wed Sep 14 06:09:20 2011 Return-Path: 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 02BE221F8C93 for ; Wed, 14 Sep 2011 06:09:20 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.447 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.447 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1, SARE_SUB_ENC_UTF8=0.152] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id vWj9ebMwWjGY for ; Wed, 14 Sep 2011 06:09:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-vw0-f42.google.com (mail-vw0-f42.google.com [209.85.212.42]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A3D6A21F8B8C for ; Wed, 14 Sep 2011 06:09:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: by vwl1 with SMTP id 1so2398305vwl.15 for ; Wed, 14 Sep 2011 06:11:24 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=QKjBZKk9jIqeOi2EP5U6OCSOcimF+aj8aTnSUkVGWEU=; b=ZetQgmCjof+m0+aYm3aS7Ov5kXvCylqrx0q1INPFg6snvq6n6zKGwf7V84rgiVX7sZ lcokzmStp9KGwJrdM3Ato6oZ+SmTNIQ1ITcsSW+z/wKAhz8nOeFfJxUfSVUFKaSgGk3+ n5Sa+gRAMFHZ49G5lF23+oI3pBCl4WOnsU+4A= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.52.107.106 with SMTP id hb10mr2826291vdb.459.1316005884411; Wed, 14 Sep 2011 06:11:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.52.111.3 with HTTP; Wed, 14 Sep 2011 06:11:24 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <4E70A6A5.2090905@att.com> References: <4E70A6A5.2090905@att.com> Date: Wed, 14 Sep 2011 09:11:24 -0400 Message-ID: From: Joseph Yee To: Tony Hansen Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Cc: "ima@ietf.org WG" Subject: Re: [EAI] UTF-8 in Message-IDs consensus X-BeenThere: ima@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: "EAI \(Email Address Internationalization\)" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 14 Sep 2011 13:09:20 -0000 Yes, my mistake. Thanks for noticing that. Revised #4 (4) The "SHOULD NOT use UTF-8" could be used in advice doc explaining the advantage of being more conservative [this is personal opinion, not as chair] Thanks Joseph On Wed, Sep 14, 2011 at 9:05 AM, Tony Hansen wrote: > On 9/14/2011 8:43 AM, Joseph Yee wrote: >> >> All, >> >> Below are consensus statement following the discussion thread UTF-8 in >> Message-IDs whether allowing UTF-8 or not: >> >> Message-ID can contain UTF-8 encodings in both formal syntax (ABNF) and >> general text. >> >> ---- >> Some note and observation >> (1) There may be hiccups during transition period, but no convincing cas= es >> demonstrating Internet or Email will be "broken badly" >> (2) With encouragement of using domain as value of id-right in practice, >> =C2=A0the WG majority preference (from past discussion, not just the ema= il thread >> mentioned above) is using U-label rather than A-label >> (3) Regarding the concern of leak, =C2=A0maybe we want to add some RECOM= MEND >> text for MAIL FROM (or EAI capable MTA) check? [personal opinion] >> (4) The "SHOULD NOT use ASCII" could be used in advice doc explaining th= e >> advantage of being more conservative [this is personal opinion, not as >> chair] > > Did you get #4 wrong? Is that supposed to read > > =C2=A0 =C2=A0SHOULD NOT use UTF-8 > > ? > > =C2=A0 =C2=A0Tony Hansen > > >> ---- >> >> >> Again, sorry that I can't send this early enough. > > _______________________________________________ > IMA mailing list > IMA@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ima > From Shawn.Steele@microsoft.com Wed Sep 14 12:15:44 2011 Return-Path: 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 D671D21F8D84 for ; Wed, 14 Sep 2011 12:15:44 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -10.373 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.373 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.074, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8, SARE_SUB_ENC_UTF8=0.152] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id qxmarnMJww-J for ; Wed, 14 Sep 2011 12:15:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp.microsoft.com (mail2.microsoft.com [131.107.115.215]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5784D21F8D7F for ; Wed, 14 Sep 2011 12:15:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from TK5EX14HUBC102.redmond.corp.microsoft.com (157.54.7.154) by TK5-EXGWY-E802.partners.extranet.microsoft.com (10.251.56.168) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 8.2.176.0; Wed, 14 Sep 2011 12:17:53 -0700 Received: from TK5EX14MBXC133.redmond.corp.microsoft.com ([169.254.2.179]) by TK5EX14HUBC102.redmond.corp.microsoft.com ([157.54.7.154]) with mapi id 14.01.0339.002; Wed, 14 Sep 2011 12:17:53 -0700 From: Shawn Steele To: "ima@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: UTF-8 in Message-IDs consensus Thread-Index: AcxzEqOfmC2Dw+cMRxWBdUTH+uh0Yw== Date: Wed, 14 Sep 2011 19:17:53 +0000 Message-ID: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [157.54.51.73] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [EAI] UTF-8 in Message-IDs consensus X-BeenThere: ima@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: "EAI \(Email Address Internationalization\)" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 14 Sep 2011 19:15:45 -0000 I'm happy with this; I'm fine with any extra text being in the advice doc, = unless it is very simple & quibble-proof :) -Shawn From arnt@gulbrandsen.priv.no Wed Sep 14 14:04:21 2011 Return-Path: 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 DBFAA21F8CC3 for ; Wed, 14 Sep 2011 14:04:21 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.523 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.523 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.076, BAYES_00=-2.599, SARE_SUB_ENC_UTF8=0.152] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id KLrIhGRjm0zT for ; Wed, 14 Sep 2011 14:04:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from strange.aox.org (strange.aox.org [IPv6:2001:4d88:100c::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0233721F8C96 for ; Wed, 14 Sep 2011 14:04:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: from fri.gulbrandsen.priv.no (kalyani.aox.org [79.140.39.164]) by strange.aox.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 49D2BFA00D8; Wed, 14 Sep 2011 21:06:29 +0000 (UTC) Received: from arnt@gulbrandsen.priv.no by fri.gulbrandsen.priv.no (Archiveopteryx 3.1.3) with esmtpsa id 1316034387-1279-1278/9/1237; Wed, 14 Sep 2011 23:06:27 +0200 Message-Id: <4E711752.5060204@gulbrandsen.priv.no> Date: Wed, 14 Sep 2011 23:06:26 +0200 From: Arnt Gulbrandsen Organization: Me, http://arnt.gulbrandsen.priv.no User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.9.2.18) Gecko/20110617 Thunderbird/3.1.11 Mime-Version: 1.0 To: ima@ietf.org References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: Re: [EAI] UTF-8 in Message-IDs consensus X-BeenThere: ima@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: "EAI \(Email Address Internationalization\)" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 14 Sep 2011 21:04:22 -0000 On 09/14/2011 09:17 PM, Shawn Steele wrote: > I'm happy with this; I'm fine with any extra text being in the advice = doc, unless it is very simple& quibble-proof :) "Implementers of message-id generation algorithms may prefer to restrain=20 their output to ASCII since that has a few minor advantages, such as=20 when constructing References fields in mailing-list threads where some=20 senders use EAI and others not." Arnt From klensin@jck.com Wed Sep 14 14:25:35 2011 Return-Path: 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 6B34621F8D2A for ; Wed, 14 Sep 2011 14:25:35 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.567 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.567 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.120, BAYES_00=-2.599, SARE_SUB_ENC_UTF8=0.152] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id SuhCYVArptzy for ; Wed, 14 Sep 2011 14:25:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: from bs.jck.com (ns.jck.com [209.187.148.211]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DE3AE21F8D1E for ; Wed, 14 Sep 2011 14:25:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=localhost) by bs.jck.com with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1R3wza-000MCt-Az; Wed, 14 Sep 2011 17:27:38 -0400 Date: Wed, 14 Sep 2011 17:27:36 -0400 From: John C Klensin To: Shawn Steele , ima@ietf.org Message-ID: <14D07F2441ADA2EBD5D53677@PST.JCK.COM> In-Reply-To: References: 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 Subject: Re: [EAI] UTF-8 in Message-IDs consensus X-BeenThere: ima@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: "EAI \(Email Address Internationalization\)" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 14 Sep 2011 21:25:35 -0000 --On Wednesday, September 14, 2011 19:17 +0000 Shawn Steele wrote: > I'm happy with this; I'm fine with any extra text being in the > advice doc, unless it is very simple & quibble-proof :) With the understanding that this should not affect the consensus call results, could people clarify which "advice document" they have in mind? From a quick look at the charter, there are four possibilities: (1) Reopen draft-ietf-eai-frmwrk-4952bis (now in the RFC Editor queue) and put text there. (2) Advice for non-ASCII & ASCII addresses (3) Advice for MUA implementors (4) Advice for EAI deployment Note that no I-Ds for any of the last three documents have been posted, indeed, the WG hasn't made a formal decision to move forward with any (much less all) of them. We have decided to not make that decision until the protocol documents are under control and we can appraise how much actual energy there is to complete the work. john From Shawn.Steele@microsoft.com Wed Sep 14 14:28:51 2011 Return-Path: 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 C886F21F8D48 for ; Wed, 14 Sep 2011 14:28:51 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -10.398 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.398 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.049, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8, SARE_SUB_ENC_UTF8=0.152] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id VD-OQX2nllAu for ; Wed, 14 Sep 2011 14:28:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp.microsoft.com (mail2.microsoft.com [131.107.115.215]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2A50321F8D3D for ; Wed, 14 Sep 2011 14:28:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: from TK5EX14MLTC101.redmond.corp.microsoft.com (157.54.79.178) by TK5-EXGWY-E802.partners.extranet.microsoft.com (10.251.56.168) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 8.2.176.0; Wed, 14 Sep 2011 14:31:00 -0700 Received: from TK5EX14MBXC133.redmond.corp.microsoft.com ([169.254.2.179]) by TK5EX14MLTC101.redmond.corp.microsoft.com ([157.54.79.178]) with mapi id 14.01.0339.002; Wed, 14 Sep 2011 14:30:55 -0700 From: Shawn Steele To: John C Klensin , "ima@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: [EAI] UTF-8 in Message-IDs consensus Thread-Index: AcxzEqOfmC2Dw+cMRxWBdUTH+uh0YwATSfcAAA6bSOA= Date: Wed, 14 Sep 2011 21:30:55 +0000 Message-ID: References: <14D07F2441ADA2EBD5D53677@PST.JCK.COM> In-Reply-To: <14D07F2441ADA2EBD5D53677@PST.JCK.COM> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [157.54.51.72] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [EAI] UTF-8 in Message-IDs consensus X-BeenThere: ima@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: "EAI \(Email Address Internationalization\)" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 14 Sep 2011 21:28:51 -0000 SSBkb27igJl0IGNhcmUgd2hpY2ggb25lLCBleGNlcHQgZG9u4oCZdCByZW9wZW4gdGhlIHF1ZXVl ZCBvbmUsIG5vdCBoaWdoIHByaW9yaXR5IGZvciBtZSwganVzdCBkb27igJl0IHdhbnQgYSBsb3Qg b2YgYmFjayBhbmQgZm9ydGguDQoNCi0tLS0tT3JpZ2luYWwgTWVzc2FnZS0tLS0tDQpGcm9tOiBK b2huIEMgS2xlbnNpbiBbbWFpbHRvOmtsZW5zaW5AamNrLmNvbV0gDQpTZW50OiDhj6bhjqLhj4Hh jqLhjqYsIOGPmuGOteGPjeGPlyAxNCwyMDExIDI6MjggUE0NClRvOiBTaGF3biBTdGVlbGU7IGlt YUBpZXRmLm9yZw0KU3ViamVjdDogUmU6IFtFQUldIFVURi04IGluIE1lc3NhZ2UtSURzIGNvbnNl bnN1cw0KDQoNCg0KLS1PbiBXZWRuZXNkYXksIFNlcHRlbWJlciAxNCwgMjAxMSAxOToxNyArMDAw MCBTaGF3biBTdGVlbGUgPFNoYXduLlN0ZWVsZUBtaWNyb3NvZnQuY29tPiB3cm90ZToNCg0KPiBJ J20gaGFwcHkgd2l0aCB0aGlzOyBJJ20gZmluZSB3aXRoIGFueSBleHRyYSB0ZXh0IGJlaW5nIGlu IHRoZSBhZHZpY2UgDQo+IGRvYywgdW5sZXNzIGl0IGlzIHZlcnkgc2ltcGxlICYgcXVpYmJsZS1w cm9vZiA6KQ0KDQpXaXRoIHRoZSB1bmRlcnN0YW5kaW5nIHRoYXQgdGhpcyBzaG91bGQgbm90IGFm ZmVjdCB0aGUgY29uc2Vuc3VzIGNhbGwgcmVzdWx0cywgY291bGQgcGVvcGxlIGNsYXJpZnkgd2hp Y2ggImFkdmljZSBkb2N1bWVudCIgdGhleSBoYXZlIGluIG1pbmQ/ICBGcm9tIGEgcXVpY2sgbG9v ayBhdCB0aGUgY2hhcnRlciwgdGhlcmUgYXJlIGZvdXINCnBvc3NpYmlsaXRpZXM6DQoNCigxKSBS ZW9wZW4gZHJhZnQtaWV0Zi1lYWktZnJtd3JrLTQ5NTJiaXMgKG5vdyBpbiB0aGUgUkZDIEVkaXRv cg0KcXVldWUpIGFuZCBwdXQgdGV4dCB0aGVyZS4NCg0KKDIpIEFkdmljZSBmb3Igbm9uLUFTQ0lJ ICYgQVNDSUkgYWRkcmVzc2VzDQooMykgQWR2aWNlIGZvciBNVUEgaW1wbGVtZW50b3JzDQooNCkg QWR2aWNlIGZvciBFQUkgZGVwbG95bWVudA0KDQpOb3RlIHRoYXQgbm8gSS1EcyBmb3IgYW55IG9m IHRoZSBsYXN0IHRocmVlIGRvY3VtZW50cyBoYXZlIGJlZW4gcG9zdGVkLCBpbmRlZWQsIHRoZSBX RyBoYXNuJ3QgbWFkZSBhIGZvcm1hbCBkZWNpc2lvbiB0byBtb3ZlIGZvcndhcmQgd2l0aCBhbnkg KG11Y2ggbGVzcyBhbGwpIG9mIHRoZW0uICBXZSBoYXZlIGRlY2lkZWQgdG8gbm90IG1ha2UgdGhh dCBkZWNpc2lvbiB1bnRpbCB0aGUgcHJvdG9jb2wgZG9jdW1lbnRzIGFyZSB1bmRlciBjb250cm9s IGFuZCB3ZSBjYW4gYXBwcmFpc2UgaG93IG11Y2ggYWN0dWFsIGVuZXJneSB0aGVyZSBpcyB0byBj b21wbGV0ZSB0aGUgd29yay4NCg0KICAgIGpvaG4NCg0KDQo= From klensin@jck.com Wed Sep 14 14:47:02 2011 Return-Path: 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 5603921F8C32 for ; Wed, 14 Sep 2011 14:47:02 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.566 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.566 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.119, BAYES_00=-2.599, SARE_SUB_ENC_UTF8=0.152] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id pWHLLfvAfDqX for ; Wed, 14 Sep 2011 14:47:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: from bs.jck.com (ns.jck.com [209.187.148.211]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BDBFA21F8BF9 for ; Wed, 14 Sep 2011 14:47:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=localhost) by bs.jck.com with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1R3xKR-000MSq-Ay; Wed, 14 Sep 2011 17:49:11 -0400 Date: Wed, 14 Sep 2011 17:49:10 -0400 From: John C Klensin To: Shawn Steele , ima@ietf.org Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: <14D07F2441ADA2EBD5D53677@PST.JCK.COM> 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 Subject: Re: [EAI] UTF-8 in Message-IDs consensus X-BeenThere: ima@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: "EAI \(Email Address Internationalization\)" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 14 Sep 2011 21:47:02 -0000 --On Wednesday, September 14, 2011 21:30 +0000 Shawn Steele wrote: > I don't care which one, except don't reopen the queued > one, not high priority for me, just don't want a lot of back > and forth. Shawn (and others), I'm asking for two main reasons: (1) I think there is a real possibility that the "advice" documents will get lost, or at least deferred for a long time, after we extrapolate from current levels of activity in the WG to the likelihood of taking on new documents and getting them done in a reasonable period. IMO, the odds go up somewhat if we handle those documents as Applicability Statements and can get WG and IESG consensus for publishing versions at Proposed Standard without broad consensus that all issues have been addressed and all nits picked, but I don't know how realistic that is. In any event, if the WG decides that the text should go into an "advice document" that has not yet been put on the agenda, we need to be prepared to abandon that text if the WG shuts down before that advice document is published. (2) There has been a brief discussion of another option, which would be to attach this sort of material as an appendix to 5335bis. That has several disadvantages, including some risk of 5335bis being delayed while we quibble about text. FWIW, my personal view is that we should narrow 5335bis and 5336bis as much as possible in the interest of getting agreement and getting them out, but that is not a co-chair opinion. Given the risk of losing the material, I do not believe the co-chairs or author team should make the decision without an opportunity for advice from the WG. john From Shawn.Steele@microsoft.com Wed Sep 14 14:48:42 2011 Return-Path: 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 14C3A21F8D0A for ; Wed, 14 Sep 2011 14:48:42 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -10.41 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.41 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.037, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8, SARE_SUB_ENC_UTF8=0.152] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Px8LtZggSAab for ; Wed, 14 Sep 2011 14:48:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp.microsoft.com (smtp.microsoft.com [131.107.115.215]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8CA9921F8C32 for ; Wed, 14 Sep 2011 14:48:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: from TK5EX14HUBC107.redmond.corp.microsoft.com (157.54.80.67) by TK5-EXGWY-E802.partners.extranet.microsoft.com (10.251.56.168) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 8.2.176.0; Wed, 14 Sep 2011 14:50:51 -0700 Received: from TK5EX14MBXC133.redmond.corp.microsoft.com ([169.254.2.179]) by TK5EX14HUBC107.redmond.corp.microsoft.com ([157.54.80.67]) with mapi id 14.01.0339.002; Wed, 14 Sep 2011 14:50:51 -0700 From: Shawn Steele To: John C Klensin , "ima@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: [EAI] UTF-8 in Message-IDs consensus Thread-Index: AcxzEqOfmC2Dw+cMRxWBdUTH+uh0YwATSfcAAA6bSOD//5EsAIAAdS2A Date: Wed, 14 Sep 2011 21:50:50 +0000 Message-ID: References: <14D07F2441ADA2EBD5D53677@PST.JCK.COM> In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [157.54.51.72] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [EAI] UTF-8 in Message-IDs consensus X-BeenThere: ima@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: "EAI \(Email Address Internationalization\)" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 14 Sep 2011 21:48:42 -0000 Yes, I realize there's a risk of the advice getting lost, however I'd rath= er take that risk than delaying or risking the existing docs -----Original Message----- From: John C Klensin [mailto:klensin@jck.com]=20 Sent: Wednesday, September 14, 2011 2:49 PM To: Shawn Steele; ima@ietf.org Subject: RE: [EAI] UTF-8 in Message-IDs consensus --On Wednesday, September 14, 2011 21:30 +0000 Shawn Steele wrote: > I don't care which one, except don't reopen the queued one, not high=20 > priority for me, just don't want a lot of back and forth. Shawn (and others), I'm asking for two main reasons: (1) I think there is a real possibility that the "advice" documents will get lost, or at least deferred for a long time, after we ext= rapolate from current levels of activity in the WG to the likelihood of tak= ing on new documents and getting them done in a reasonable period. IMO, th= e odds go up somewhat if we handle those documents as Applicability Stateme= nts and can get WG and IESG consensus for publishing versions at Proposed S= tandard without broad consensus that all issues have been addressed and all= nits picked, but I don't know how realistic that is. In any event, if the WG decides that the text should go into an "advice document" that has not yet been put on the agenda, we ne= ed to be prepared to abandon that text if the WG shuts down before that adv= ice document is published. (2) There has been a brief discussion of another option, which would be to = attach this sort of material as an appendix to 5335bis. That has several d= isadvantages, including some risk of 5335bis being delayed while we quibble= about text. FWIW, my personal view is that we should narrow 5335bis and 5336bis as much= as possible in the interest of getting agreement and getting them out, but= that is not a co-chair opinion. Given the risk of losing the material, I = do not believe the co-chairs or author team should make the decision withou= t an opportunity for advice from the WG. john From jyee@afilias.info Wed Sep 14 14:52:30 2011 Return-Path: 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 447D021F8CAD for ; Wed, 14 Sep 2011 14:52:27 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -5.984 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.984 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.129, BAYES_00=-2.599, IP_NOT_FRIENDLY=0.334, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, SARE_SUB_ENC_UTF8=0.152] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id TiTNPPtyI8eR for ; Wed, 14 Sep 2011 14:52:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from outbound.afilias.info (outbound.afilias.info [69.46.124.26]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1C30521F8CAB for ; Wed, 14 Sep 2011 14:52:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ms5.yyz2.afilias-ops.info ([10.50.129.111] helo=smtp.afilias.info) by outbound.afilias.info with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1R3xPf-0004Ew-5p for ima@ietf.org; Wed, 14 Sep 2011 21:54:35 +0000 Received: from mail-gy0-f178.google.com ([209.85.160.178]) by smtp.afilias.info with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1R3xPf-0003zl-5C for ima@ietf.org; Wed, 14 Sep 2011 21:54:35 +0000 Received: by gyf1 with SMTP id 1so1712396gyf.9 for ; Wed, 14 Sep 2011 14:54:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.101.26.35 with SMTP id d35mr323500anj.112.1316037274154; Wed, 14 Sep 2011 14:54:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.0.103] (76-10-164-182.dsl.teksavvy.com [76.10.164.182]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id k12sm10181915anc.19.2011.09.14.14.54.32 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Wed, 14 Sep 2011 14:54:33 -0700 (PDT) Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1084) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii From: Joseph Yee In-Reply-To: <14D07F2441ADA2EBD5D53677@PST.JCK.COM> Date: Wed, 14 Sep 2011 17:54:31 -0400 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: <14D07F2441ADA2EBD5D53677@PST.JCK.COM> To: John C Klensin X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1084) Cc: Shawn Steele , ima@ietf.org Subject: Re: [EAI] UTF-8 in Message-IDs consensus X-BeenThere: ima@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: "EAI \(Email Address Internationalization\)" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 14 Sep 2011 21:52:31 -0000 Hi all, My original thought (and a personal thought) is to capture it and think = about it again after core doc. So would all agree that we (the WG) just = capture it in issue log (Trac) for now and think more about it when the = time is right? Unless the rough consensus is to put it into RFC4952bis. = =20 Best Regards, Joseph, co-chair of EAI On 2011-09-14, at 5:27 PM, John C Klensin wrote: >=20 >=20 > --On Wednesday, September 14, 2011 19:17 +0000 Shawn Steele > wrote: >=20 >> I'm happy with this; I'm fine with any extra text being in the >> advice doc, unless it is very simple & quibble-proof :) >=20 > With the understanding that this should not affect the consensus > call results, could people clarify which "advice document" they > have in mind? =46rom a quick look at the charter, there are four > possibilities: >=20 > (1) Reopen draft-ietf-eai-frmwrk-4952bis (now in the RFC Editor > queue) and put text there. >=20 > (2) Advice for non-ASCII & ASCII addresses > (3) Advice for MUA implementors > (4) Advice for EAI deployment >=20 > Note that no I-Ds for any of the last three documents have been > posted, indeed, the WG hasn't made a formal decision to move > forward with any (much less all) of them. We have decided to > not make that decision until the protocol documents are under > control and we can appraise how much actual energy there is to > complete the work. >=20 > john >=20 > _______________________________________________ > IMA mailing list > IMA@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ima From Shawn.Steele@microsoft.com Wed Sep 14 15:03:55 2011 Return-Path: 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 4842621F8D87 for ; Wed, 14 Sep 2011 15:03:55 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -10.417 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.417 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.030, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8, SARE_SUB_ENC_UTF8=0.152] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id J2BUL1z2b9km for ; Wed, 14 Sep 2011 15:03:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp.microsoft.com (mailb.microsoft.com [131.107.115.215]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BDA9921F8D80 for ; Wed, 14 Sep 2011 15:03:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from TK5EX14MLTC103.redmond.corp.microsoft.com (157.54.79.174) by TK5-EXGWY-E802.partners.extranet.microsoft.com (10.251.56.168) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 8.2.176.0; Wed, 14 Sep 2011 15:06:04 -0700 Received: from TK5EX14MBXC133.redmond.corp.microsoft.com ([169.254.2.179]) by TK5EX14MLTC103.redmond.corp.microsoft.com ([157.54.79.174]) with mapi id 14.01.0339.002; Wed, 14 Sep 2011 15:06:04 -0700 From: Shawn Steele To: Joseph Yee , John C Klensin Thread-Topic: [EAI] UTF-8 in Message-IDs consensus Thread-Index: AcxzEqOfmC2Dw+cMRxWBdUTH+uh0YwATSfcAAADwqIAADkihYA== Date: Wed, 14 Sep 2011 22:06:03 +0000 Message-ID: References: <14D07F2441ADA2EBD5D53677@PST.JCK.COM> In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [157.54.51.72] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Cc: "ima@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [EAI] UTF-8 in Message-IDs consensus X-BeenThere: ima@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: "EAI \(Email Address Internationalization\)" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 14 Sep 2011 22:03:55 -0000 Yes, that's my preference (capture it) -----Original Message----- From: Joseph Yee [mailto:jyee@afilias.info]=20 Sent: Wednesday, September 14, 2011 2:55 PM To: John C Klensin Cc: Shawn Steele; ima@ietf.org Subject: Re: [EAI] UTF-8 in Message-IDs consensus Hi all, My original thought (and a personal thought) is to capture it and think abo= ut it again after core doc. So would all agree that we (the WG) just captu= re it in issue log (Trac) for now and think more about it when the time is = right? Unless the rough consensus is to put it into RFC4952bis. =20 Best Regards, Joseph, co-chair of EAI On 2011-09-14, at 5:27 PM, John C Klensin wrote: >=20 >=20 > --On Wednesday, September 14, 2011 19:17 +0000 Shawn Steele=20 > wrote: >=20 >> I'm happy with this; I'm fine with any extra text being in the advice=20 >> doc, unless it is very simple & quibble-proof :) >=20 > With the understanding that this should not affect the consensus call=20 > results, could people clarify which "advice document" they have in=20 > mind? From a quick look at the charter, there are four > possibilities: >=20 > (1) Reopen draft-ietf-eai-frmwrk-4952bis (now in the RFC Editor > queue) and put text there. >=20 > (2) Advice for non-ASCII & ASCII addresses > (3) Advice for MUA implementors > (4) Advice for EAI deployment >=20 > Note that no I-Ds for any of the last three documents have been=20 > posted, indeed, the WG hasn't made a formal decision to move forward=20 > with any (much less all) of them. We have decided to not make that=20 > decision until the protocol documents are under control and we can=20 > appraise how much actual energy there is to complete the work. >=20 > john >=20 > _______________________________________________ > IMA mailing list > IMA@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ima From internet-drafts@ietf.org Wed Sep 14 20:43:22 2011 Return-Path: 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 7CAA621F893C; Wed, 14 Sep 2011 20:43:22 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.582 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.582 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.017, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id cs+NEcf6FjSm; Wed, 14 Sep 2011 20:43:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1E3FF21F886A; Wed, 14 Sep 2011 20:43:22 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable From: internet-drafts@ietf.org To: i-d-announce@ietf.org X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 3.60 Message-ID: <20110915034322.5308.65150.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Wed, 14 Sep 2011 20:43:22 -0700 Cc: ima@ietf.org Subject: [EAI] I-D Action: draft-ietf-eai-rfc5336bis-13.txt X-BeenThere: ima@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: "EAI \(Email Address Internationalization\)" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 15 Sep 2011 03:43:22 -0000 A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts director= ies. This draft is a work item of the Email Address Internationalization Wo= rking Group of the IETF. Title : SMTP Extension for Internationalized Email Author(s) : Jiankang Yao W. Mao Filename : draft-ietf-eai-rfc5336bis-13.txt Pages : 21 Date : 2011-09-14 This document specifies an SMTP extension for transport and delivery of email messages with internationalized email addresses or header information. A URL for this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-eai-rfc5336bis-13.txt Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ This Internet-Draft can be retrieved at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-eai-rfc5336bis-13.txt From duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp Wed Sep 14 21:14:56 2011 Return-Path: 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 B4EBA21F85F6 for ; Wed, 14 Sep 2011 21:14:56 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -99.674 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-99.674 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.036, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_JP=1.244, HOST_EQ_JP=1.265, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, SARE_SUB_ENC_UTF8=0.152, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 2i1SJ8YDapmb for ; Wed, 14 Sep 2011 21:14:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: from scintmta01.scbb.aoyama.ac.jp (scintmta01.scbb.aoyama.ac.jp [133.2.253.33]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C397B21F85DB for ; Wed, 14 Sep 2011 21:14:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: from scmse02.scbb.aoyama.ac.jp ([133.2.253.231]) by scintmta01.scbb.aoyama.ac.jp (secret/secret) with SMTP id p8F4Glg3000859 for ; Thu, 15 Sep 2011 13:16:52 +0900 Received: from (unknown [133.2.206.133]) by scmse02.scbb.aoyama.ac.jp with smtp id 0c50_0dfe_877c6934_df51_11e0_8e4e_001d096c5782; Thu, 15 Sep 2011 13:16:47 +0900 Received: from [IPv6:::1] ([133.2.210.1]:42619) by itmail.it.aoyama.ac.jp with [XMail 1.22 ESMTP Server] id for from ; Thu, 15 Sep 2011 13:16:51 +0900 Message-ID: <4E717C2B.7080000@it.aoyama.ac.jp> Date: Thu, 15 Sep 2011 13:16:43 +0900 From: =?UTF-8?B?Ik1hcnRpbiBKLiBEw7xyc3Qi?= Organization: Aoyama Gakuin University User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-US; rv:1.9.1.9) Gecko/20100722 Eudora/3.0.4 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Arnt Gulbrandsen References: <4E711752.5060204@gulbrandsen.priv.no> In-Reply-To: <4E711752.5060204@gulbrandsen.priv.no> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: ima@ietf.org Subject: Re: [EAI] UTF-8 in Message-IDs consensus X-BeenThere: ima@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: "EAI \(Email Address Internationalization\)" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 15 Sep 2011 04:14:56 -0000 On 2011/09/15 6:06, Arnt Gulbrandsen wrote: > On 09/14/2011 09:17 PM, Shawn Steele wrote: >> I'm happy with this; I'm fine with any extra text being in the advice >> doc, unless it is very simple& quibble-proof :) > > "Implementers of message-id generation algorithms may prefer to restrain > their output to ASCII since that has a few minor advantages, such as > when constructing References fields in mailing-list threads where some > senders use EAI and others not." Just in case we put a text like this in (I don't mind one way or another), please remove "minor". Regards, Martin. From internet-drafts@ietf.org Sun Sep 18 09:31:01 2011 Return-Path: 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 738F121F855F; Sun, 18 Sep 2011 09:31:01 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.525 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.525 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.074, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id JUDeS7zWOYV3; Sun, 18 Sep 2011 09:31:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0FBD021F84FD; Sun, 18 Sep 2011 09:31:01 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable From: internet-drafts@ietf.org To: i-d-announce@ietf.org X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 3.60 Message-ID: <20110918163101.23970.76369.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Sun, 18 Sep 2011 09:31:01 -0700 Cc: ima@ietf.org Subject: [EAI] I-D Action: draft-ietf-eai-rfc5335bis-12.txt X-BeenThere: ima@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: "EAI \(Email Address Internationalization\)" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 18 Sep 2011 16:31:01 -0000 A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts director= ies. This draft is a work item of the Email Address Internationalization Wo= rking Group of the IETF. Title : Internationalized Email Headers Author(s) : Abel Yang Shawn Steele Ned Freed Filename : draft-ietf-eai-rfc5335bis-12.txt Pages : 13 Date : 2011-09-18 Internet mail was originally limited to 7-bit ASCII. MIME added support for the use of 8-bit character sets in body parts, and also defined an encoded-word construct so other character sets could be used in certain header field values. But full internationalization of electronic mail requires additional enhancements to allow the use of Unicode, including characters outside the ASCII repertoire, in mail addresses as well as direct use of Unicode in header fields like From:, To:, and Subject:, without requiring the use of complex encoded-word constructs. This document specifies an enhancement to the Internet Message Format that allows use of Unicode in mail addresses and most header field content. A URL for this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-eai-rfc5335bis-12.txt Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ This Internet-Draft can be retrieved at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-eai-rfc5335bis-12.txt From trac+eai@trac.tools.ietf.org Mon Sep 19 07:55:41 2011 Return-Path: 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 0C45621F8C19 for ; Mon, 19 Sep 2011 07:55:41 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.447 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.447 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, SARE_SUB_ENC_UTF8=0.152, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 711PRR+vhiBN for ; Mon, 19 Sep 2011 07:55:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from gamay.tools.ietf.org (gamay.tools.ietf.org [208.66.40.242]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8F53021F8C18 for ; Mon, 19 Sep 2011 07:55:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=gamay.tools.ietf.org) by gamay.tools.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1R5fII-0002AO-Tj; Mon, 19 Sep 2011 10:58:03 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit From: "eai issue tracker" X-Trac-Version: 0.11.7 Precedence: bulk Auto-Submitted: auto-generated X-Mailer: Trac 0.11.7, by Edgewall Software To: jyee@ca.afilias.info X-Trac-Project: eai Date: Mon, 19 Sep 2011 14:58:02 -0000 X-URL: http://tools.ietf.org/wg/eai/ X-Trac-Ticket-URL: http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/eai/trac/ticket/11 Message-ID: <061.9721166081247d3e53392a010db4b79a@trac.tools.ietf.org> X-Trac-Ticket-ID: 11 X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: ::1 X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: jyee@ca.afilias.info, ima@ietf.org X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: trac+eai@trac.tools.ietf.org X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on gamay.tools.ietf.org); SAEximRunCond expanded to false Cc: ima@ietf.org Subject: [EAI] [eai] #11: Capture the scenario of "SHOULD not use UTF-8 in Message-ID" for future advice draft X-BeenThere: ima@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Reply-To: ima@ietf.org List-Id: "EAI \(Email Address Internationalization\)" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 19 Sep 2011 14:55:41 -0000 #11: Capture the scenario of "SHOULD not use UTF-8 in Message-ID" for future advice draft The "SHOULD NOT use UTF-8" could be used in advice doc explaining the advantage of being more conservative -- "Implementers of message-id generation algorithms may prefer to restrain their output to ASCII since that has a few minor advantages, such as when constructing References fields in mailing-list threads where some senders use EAI and others not." suggestion from Arnt Gulbrandsen --- Just in case we put a text like this in (I don't mind one way or another), please remove "minor". suggestion from Martin Durst -- -----------------------------------+---------------------------------------- Reporter: jyee@… | Owner: Type: enhancement | Status: new Priority: minor | Milestone: Component: scenarios | Version: Severity: Candidate WG Document | Keywords: -----------------------------------+---------------------------------------- Ticket URL: eai From jyee@afilias.info Mon Sep 19 07:57:35 2011 Return-Path: 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 C583221F8C18 for ; Mon, 19 Sep 2011 07:57:35 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -5.925 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.925 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.112, BAYES_00=-2.599, IP_NOT_FRIENDLY=0.334, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, SARE_SUB_ENC_UTF8=0.152] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id kWZIErmuj9LI for ; Mon, 19 Sep 2011 07:57:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: from outbound.afilias.info (outbound.afilias.info [69.46.124.26]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3B91121F8C06 for ; Mon, 19 Sep 2011 07:57:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ms6.yyz2.afilias-ops.info ([10.50.129.112] helo=smtp.afilias.info) by outbound.afilias.info with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1R5fKA-0003ze-6c for ima@ietf.org; Mon, 19 Sep 2011 14:59:58 +0000 Received: from mail-qy0-f178.google.com ([209.85.216.178]) by smtp.afilias.info with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1R5fK9-0001Xu-95 for ima@ietf.org; Mon, 19 Sep 2011 14:59:57 +0000 Received: by qyg14 with SMTP id 14so6475563qyg.9 for ; Mon, 19 Sep 2011 07:59:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.224.200.8 with SMTP id eu8mr2127716qab.145.1316444392653; Mon, 19 Sep 2011 07:59:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from jyee-lt.tor.afilias-int.info (tor-gateway.afilias.info. [199.15.87.4]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id hc3sm16547330qab.22.2011.09.19.07.59.49 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Mon, 19 Sep 2011 07:59:51 -0700 (PDT) Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1084) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 From: Joseph Yee In-Reply-To: <4E717C2B.7080000@it.aoyama.ac.jp> Date: Mon, 19 Sep 2011 10:59:48 -0400 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <9302400C-4C2C-4F62-A638-586DA0ED6850@afilias.info> References: <4E711752.5060204@gulbrandsen.priv.no> <4E717C2B.7080000@it.aoyama.ac.jp> To: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Martin_J=2E_D=FCrst?= X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1084) Cc: Arnt Gulbrandsen , ima@ietf.org Subject: Re: [EAI] UTF-8 in Message-IDs consensus X-BeenThere: ima@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: "EAI \(Email Address Internationalization\)" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 19 Sep 2011 14:57:35 -0000 All, I have create a ticket in Trac about the scenario for future reference. http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/eai/trac/ticket/11 We will revisit this only after core drafts completed. Thanks Joseph, co-chair of EAI On 2011-09-15, at 12:16 AM, Martin J. D=FCrst wrote: > On 2011/09/15 6:06, Arnt Gulbrandsen wrote: >> On 09/14/2011 09:17 PM, Shawn Steele wrote: >>> I'm happy with this; I'm fine with any extra text being in the = advice >>> doc, unless it is very simple& quibble-proof :) >>=20 >> "Implementers of message-id generation algorithms may prefer to = restrain >> their output to ASCII since that has a few minor advantages, such as >> when constructing References fields in mailing-list threads where = some >> senders use EAI and others not." >=20 > Just in case we put a text like this in (I don't mind one way or = another), please remove "minor". >=20 > Regards, Martin. > _______________________________________________ > IMA mailing list > IMA@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ima From ned+ima@mrochek.com Mon Sep 19 07:59:31 2011 Return-Path: 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 B38A321F8C18 for ; Mon, 19 Sep 2011 07:59:31 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.462 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.462 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.015, BAYES_00=-2.599, SARE_SUB_ENC_UTF8=0.152] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id jMCzC22+xPs5 for ; Mon, 19 Sep 2011 07:59:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mauve.mrochek.com (mauve.mrochek.com [66.59.230.40]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2000621F8C1A for ; Mon, 19 Sep 2011 07:59:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dkim-sign.mauve.mrochek.com by mauve.mrochek.com (PMDF V6.1-1 #35243) id <01O68AN8KJVK0119LR@mauve.mrochek.com> for ima@ietf.org; Mon, 19 Sep 2011 08:00:13 -0700 (PDT) MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=utf-8 Received: from mauve.mrochek.com by mauve.mrochek.com (PMDF V6.1-1 #35243) id <01O65S7BB8B4014O5Z@mauve.mrochek.com> (original mail from NED@mauve.mrochek.com) for ima@ietf.org; Mon, 19 Sep 2011 08:00:06 -0700 (PDT) From: ned+ima@mrochek.com Message-id: <01O68AN5NRSW014O5Z@mauve.mrochek.com> Date: Mon, 19 Sep 2011 07:58:11 -0700 (PDT) In-reply-to: "Your message dated Mon, 19 Sep 2011 14:58:02 +0000" <061.9721166081247d3e53392a010db4b79a@trac.tools.ietf.org> References: <061.9721166081247d3e53392a010db4b79a@trac.tools.ietf.org> To: eai issue tracker DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=mrochek.com; s=mauve; t=1316444485; bh=T2GbIF9GmL1Oc+LmIdWPj+Bbs6lnoDVnd9v8nARuqMw=; h=MIME-version:Content-type:From:Cc:Message-id:Date:Subject: In-reply-to:References:To; b=DryWanJDAaNxz5CJ8WJ+iRFGekdVemDrbqpjY1cle8WXEZiSnpeEqcgA8U398MoLM leXu8Jkr3dx+BQlEwjyHM1EsqMowSM0ay0XCcYz5a6k+fi6xKOFm7OQl2tfnEWgBEP ni3WHX5D+idhLeLN4xZ/gY/YQFT3zEtt43K1gI7I= Cc: jyee@ca.afilias.info, ima@ietf.org Subject: Re: [EAI] [eai] #11: Capture the scenario of "SHOULD not use UTF-8 in Message-ID" for future advice draft X-BeenThere: ima@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: "EAI \(Email Address Internationalization\)" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 19 Sep 2011 14:59:31 -0000 A slightly different version of this text has already been added to 5335bis (and noted in the change list). However, I used a MAY, not a SHOULD. Ned > #11: Capture the scenario of "SHOULD not use UTF-8 in Message-ID" for future > advice draft > The "SHOULD NOT use UTF-8" could be used in advice doc explaining the > advantage of being more conservative > -- > "Implementers of message-id generation algorithms may prefer to restrain > their output to ASCII since that has a few minor advantages, such as when > constructing References fields in mailing-list threads where some senders > use EAI and others not." > suggestion from Arnt Gulbrandsen > --- > Just in case we put a text like this in (I don't mind one way or another), > please remove "minor". > suggestion from Martin Durst > -- > -----------------------------------+---------------------------------------- > Reporter: jyee@… | Owner: > Type: enhancement | Status: new > Priority: minor | Milestone: > Component: scenarios | Version: > Severity: Candidate WG Document | Keywords: > -----------------------------------+---------------------------------------- > Ticket URL: > eai > _______________________________________________ > IMA mailing list > IMA@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ima From Shawn.Steele@microsoft.com Mon Sep 19 09:42:59 2011 Return-Path: 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 92D9E21F8C2A for ; Mon, 19 Sep 2011 09:42:59 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -10.498 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.498 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.101, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id q-PBzSTJIuml for ; Mon, 19 Sep 2011 09:42:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp.microsoft.com (mailc.microsoft.com [131.107.115.214]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2849721F8C11 for ; Mon, 19 Sep 2011 09:42:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from TK5EX14MLTC101.redmond.corp.microsoft.com (157.54.79.178) by TK5-EXGWY-E803.partners.extranet.microsoft.com (10.251.56.169) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 8.2.176.0; Mon, 19 Sep 2011 09:45:22 -0700 Received: from TK5EX14MBXC133.redmond.corp.microsoft.com ([169.254.2.152]) by TK5EX14MLTC101.redmond.corp.microsoft.com ([157.54.79.178]) with mapi id 14.01.0339.002; Mon, 19 Sep 2011 09:45:22 -0700 From: Shawn Steele To: "ima@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: I-D Action: draft-ietf-eai-rfc5336bis-13.txt Thread-Index: Acx261tw/CL6NITMSNerkhAc6X7J7Q== Date: Mon, 19 Sep 2011 16:45:21 +0000 Message-ID: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [157.54.51.71] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [EAI] I-D Action: draft-ietf-eai-rfc5336bis-13.txt X-BeenThere: ima@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: "EAI \(Email Address Internationalization\)" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 19 Sep 2011 16:42:59 -0000 I am happy with draft-ietf-eai-rfc5336bis-13.txt, FWIW... - Shawn From dhc2@dcrocker.net Mon Sep 19 10:22:45 2011 Return-Path: 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 183AD21F8BE9 for ; Mon, 19 Sep 2011 10:22:45 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.158 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.158 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.289, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, SARE_SUB_ENC_UTF8=0.152] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id izTi5F3t5vre for ; Mon, 19 Sep 2011 10:22:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sbh17.songbird.com (sbh17.songbird.com [72.52.113.17]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7510F21F8B36 for ; Mon, 19 Sep 2011 10:22:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.1.7] (adsl-68-122-32-32.dsl.pltn13.pacbell.net [68.122.32.32]) (authenticated bits=0) by sbh17.songbird.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id p8JHP2Xa000690 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Mon, 19 Sep 2011 10:25:08 -0700 Message-ID: <4E777AED.5010906@dcrocker.net> Date: Mon, 19 Sep 2011 10:25:01 -0700 From: Dave CROCKER Organization: Brandenburg InternetWorking User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:6.0.2) Gecko/20110902 Thunderbird/6.0.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: ima@ietf.org References: <061.9721166081247d3e53392a010db4b79a@trac.tools.ietf.org> <01O68AN5NRSW014O5Z@mauve.mrochek.com> In-Reply-To: <01O68AN5NRSW014O5Z@mauve.mrochek.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.0 (sbh17.songbird.com [72.52.113.17]); Mon, 19 Sep 2011 10:25:08 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: [EAI] [eai] #11: Capture the scenario of "SHOULD not use UTF-8 in Message-ID" for future advice draft X-BeenThere: ima@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list Reply-To: dcrocker@bbiw.net List-Id: "EAI \(Email Address Internationalization\)" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 19 Sep 2011 17:22:45 -0000 On 9/19/2011 7:58 AM, ned+ima@mrochek.com wrote: >> "Implementers of message-id generation algorithms may prefer to restrain >> their output to ASCII since that has a few minor advantages, such as when >> constructing References fields in mailing-list threads where some senders >> use EAI and others not." I looked over the draft, and this language made me very uncomfortable. The reason is that -- once again -- it has this draft trying to juggle a hybrid (UTF-8/ASCII-only) world, rather than a much simpler UTF-8 only world. Indeed, the language that results looks awkward. A simple question is why this juggling is appropriate here but not in the rest of the core drafts, including this one? For the situations that need this special treatment, why do they /not/ also need it for all other occurrences of UTF-8. And in answering that question, consider whether those are edge conditions or likely to be typical. d/ -- Dave Crocker Brandenburg InternetWorking bbiw.net From ned+ima@mrochek.com Mon Sep 19 11:19:05 2011 Return-Path: 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 37DDD21F8CBE for ; Mon, 19 Sep 2011 11:19:05 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.461 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.461 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.014, BAYES_00=-2.599, SARE_SUB_ENC_UTF8=0.152] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id xvPf+W+Km0MC for ; Mon, 19 Sep 2011 11:19:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mauve.mrochek.com (mauve.mrochek.com [66.59.230.40]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 92B3721F8CB1 for ; Mon, 19 Sep 2011 11:19:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dkim-sign.mauve.mrochek.com by mauve.mrochek.com (PMDF V6.1-1 #35243) id <01O68HLP5NUO00WQFF@mauve.mrochek.com> for ima@ietf.org; Mon, 19 Sep 2011 11:19:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mauve.mrochek.com by mauve.mrochek.com (PMDF V6.1-1 #35243) id <01O68GZ66CTS014O5Z@mauve.mrochek.com> (original mail from NED@mauve.mrochek.com) for ima@ietf.org; Mon, 19 Sep 2011 11:19:42 -0700 (PDT) From: ned+ima@mrochek.com Message-id: <01O68HLMXW6O014O5Z@mauve.mrochek.com> Date: Mon, 19 Sep 2011 11:06:52 -0700 (PDT) In-reply-to: "Your message dated Mon, 19 Sep 2011 10:25:01 -0700" <4E777AED.5010906@dcrocker.net> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: TEXT/PLAIN; Format=flowed References: <061.9721166081247d3e53392a010db4b79a@trac.tools.ietf.org> <01O68AN5NRSW014O5Z@mauve.mrochek.com> <4E777AED.5010906@dcrocker.net> To: Dave CROCKER DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=mrochek.com; s=mauve; t=1316456459; bh=a+93mTq4IkKqeFXV+2d+JP8i6EXqJY6bLrN+gxCqHWA=; h=From:Cc:Message-id:Date:Subject:In-reply-to:MIME-version: Content-type:References:To; b=R83svVahipJftanEDqBG+CAhDV2rwYbnPjSsU3wYdNoffKQVrtE8ZW+iMcFBfeRRq r35Wg5ETJD4nPd26qBcDiZvc6OOcPIXk3KmHR//DgL7shYuA7jegIgAnIMljFOeMMA UM8jVLLjzhDuwgTanwtrufqaWhLjG0ZzwhZuvP5A= Cc: ima@ietf.org Subject: Re: [EAI] [eai] #11: Capture the scenario of "SHOULD not use UTF-8 in Message-ID" for future advice draft X-BeenThere: ima@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: "EAI \(Email Address Internationalization\)" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 19 Sep 2011 18:19:05 -0000 > On 9/19/2011 7:58 AM, ned+ima@mrochek.com wrote: > >> "Implementers of message-id generation algorithms may prefer to restrain > >> their output to ASCII since that has a few minor advantages, such as when > >> constructing References fields in mailing-list threads where some senders > >> use EAI and others not." > I looked over the draft, and this language made me very uncomfortable. I don't see why. It's a fact that using 8-bit utf-8 in message-ids (1) isn't really necessary and (2) creates a situation where replies are forced to be EAI messages when otherwise they may not have needed to be. Saying that generators of such fields need to be aware of the consequences seems completely reasonable to me, and it also aligns quite well with the nearby sections on line limits, encoded words, and encoding restrictions, all of which have very much the same overall character as this. > The reason is that -- once again -- it has this draft trying to juggle a hybrid > (UTF-8/ASCII-only) world, rather than a much simpler UTF-8 only world. Indeed, > the language that results looks awkward. No, it really isn't doing that. > A simple question is why this juggling is appropriate here but not in the rest > of the core drafts, including this one? Since the juggling you refer to is in fact nonexistent, this question is unanswerable. > For the situations that need this special treatment, why do they /not/ also need > it for all other occurrences of UTF-8. Because they aren't comparable cases. Again, there is no real need to generate utf-8 message-ids - these are fields for automatic processing, not presentation to the user. The same cannot be said for addresses, subject fields, etc. etc. And yes, there are other automatically processed fields where we're now allowing 8-bit utf-8, but AFAIK none of them have the additional cascading effect message-ids have. (And if someone can identify additional cases they should also be noted in this specification.) In short, this is a special case, one that arises from a combination of factors, and for that reason it's worth noting. > And in answering that question, consider > whether those are edge conditions or likely to be typical. The message-id issue is most certainly going to create issues for clients. Ned From hmdmhdfmhdjmzdtjmzdtzktdkztdjz@gmail.com Mon Sep 19 11:36:41 2011 Return-Path: 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 1B25A21F8476 for ; Mon, 19 Sep 2011 11:36:41 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.865 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.865 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.082, BAYES_00=-2.599, FROM_LOCAL_NOVOWEL=0.5, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1, SARE_SUB_ENC_UTF8=0.152, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id DIX16B3cACNh for ; Mon, 19 Sep 2011 11:36:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-yw0-f44.google.com (mail-yw0-f44.google.com [209.85.213.44]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 13BE721F8CA3 for ; Mon, 19 Sep 2011 11:36:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: by ywa6 with SMTP id 6so5207134ywa.31 for ; Mon, 19 Sep 2011 11:39:00 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-type; bh=vWpYNuYjf7KFJ3n9vT/xn72KTE23GhMt8ms7A9gZ4lQ=; b=LYu/6EQAf3rWBv+vcHj81O9IPDiMG+cEX8KEJsyrgwHQ7DAwGXuZV6LBqC/xb7H8E2 bBa8BNkT90cgmJYKrQ+JL8HGR0cEIbbJSSD00/cvGDm0CT6N7az6Wmf4HSYpgIMVjXHg zxOzrbXtV5V1RT0YhU+9fQ55LYjAi5XWMGLKo= Received: by 10.68.14.226 with SMTP id s2mr4479613pbc.448.1316457540134; Mon, 19 Sep 2011 11:39:00 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.142.101.15 with HTTP; Mon, 19 Sep 2011 11:38:20 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <4E777AED.5010906@dcrocker.net> References: <061.9721166081247d3e53392a010db4b79a@trac.tools.ietf.org> <01O68AN5NRSW014O5Z@mauve.mrochek.com> <4E777AED.5010906@dcrocker.net> From: Frank Ellermann Date: Mon, 19 Sep 2011 20:38:20 +0200 Message-ID: To: dcrocker@bbiw.net Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Cc: ima@ietf.org Subject: Re: [EAI] [eai] #11: Capture the scenario of "SHOULD not use UTF-8 in Message-ID" for future advice draft X-BeenThere: ima@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: "EAI \(Email Address Internationalization\)" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 19 Sep 2011 18:36:41 -0000 On 19 September 2011 19:25, Dave CROCKER wrote: > A simple question is why this juggling is appropriate here but > not in the rest of the core drafts, including this one? The technical problems of "folks want to use local parts in their scripts and languages" vs. "messages need a unique part to form a globally unique message ID" are _technically_ unrelated. That unique@ and local@ are _historically_ almost the same syntax has no _technical_ reason I'm aware of. Besides you would know it better. For the purposes of NetNews message IDs are as important as say IP for the purposes of TCP. That's as simple as 1-2-3. Don't waste time with MAYs or SHOULDs, anything below a MUST is "broken by design", details don't matter, or make it worse. -Frank From ned+ima@mrochek.com Mon Sep 19 11:43:50 2011 Return-Path: