Subject: [apps-discuss] 2 remaining open issues in draft-ietf-appsawg-mdn-3798bis-05.txt

From: Alexey Melnikov <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 23 Dec 2015 15:28:19 +0000

Hi,
There are 2 remaining issues that Tony and I would like to resolve 
before WGLC should be started on the document:

1) The document should say something about cardinality of 
Disposition-Notification-To (I think "0 or 1") and 
Disposition-Notification-Options header fields (not sure, 0 or 1?). If 
multiple instances of Disposition-Notification-Options are allowed, what 
should be their semantics?

If you have general information about how clients handle multiple 
Disposition-Notification-To and/or Disposition-Notification-Options, 
please let us know.

2) Should RFC 2047 encoded words be allowed in various places in the 
machine parseable MDN part?

My default preference would be to disallow that (comments are allowed in 
various places) and refer implementors to RFC 6533 if they want non 
ASCII comments.

I can also see a small argument for allowing encoded words in the 
Reporting-UA field.

If you have information about use of encoded words by existing MDN 
parsers/generators, please let us know.

Best Regards,
Alexey