Subject: [EAI] Key decisions from San Diego

From: Harald Alvestrand <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 22 Dec 2006 10:35:48 +0100

Extracted from the minutes:

- No new issues have been identified on - framework. Will go to IESG
after WG Last Call.

- Randy Gellens will write a new version of the mailing list draft

- Chris Newman will write a new draft on DSN extensions for UTF8SMTP.

- A strong leaning of the room towards removing the UTF8SMTP field from
the headers, but enough people said "can't decide" that we need a list
discussion of this issue

- The WG meeting was unable to decide on what to do with UTF-8 in
headers on MIME body parts. The alternatives were:
  - Do not allow it (probably unacceptable, especially for filename
parameter)
  - Allow it, and downgrade to 2047 outside quotes and 2231 inside quotes
  - Allow it, and downgrade to 2047 both outside and inside quotes
List discussion needed.

- The WG meeting decided that dropping a To: or Cc: header that has an
UTF8SMTP address without an alt-address is not acceptable, and neither
is bouncing such a message. Alternatives for encoding the content of the
header were discussed, but none were selected.

I think that's the key resolutions.

                      Harald

_______________________________________________
IMA mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ima

---

From: Kari Hurtta <[email-masked]>
Date: 22 Dec 2006 13:31:12 +0200

>   - Allow it, and downgrade to 2047 both outside and inside quotes

Uhh.

RFC 2047  is valid here only on comments ie. inside of ( ) 

Therefore only comments can be RFC 2047 encoded.

Mime parameter values can be RFC 2231 encoded.

/ Kari Hurtta

---

From: "Charles Lindsey" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 22 Dec 2006 15:06:16 -0000

> the headers, but enough people said "can't decide" that we need a list

OK, I have given reasons why that is a Bad Thing.
>   - Allow it, and downgrade to 2047 both outside and inside quotes

I think it HAS to be 2231. It is a mess, and nobody likes it, but it is  
the proposed standard on the matter. Let us not invent any new encoding  
schemes.

And for message that begin and end in UTF8SMTP, the question will never  
arise. For the odd case that goes through downgrading, the 'filename'  
(which is only advisory) will not get interpreted, or it will be  
interpreted as some garbage and the filename created with that garbage  
name. The sky will not fall in either way.
> header were discussed, but none were selected.

I think the _essential_ feature is that a Downgraded header is created, so  
that the original is not lost. Given that, I don't care if the headers  
carried forward contain just '<>', or even if they are deleted. An  
'upgrade' program can probably restore them, and if not a human can do it.

-- 
Charles H. Lindsey ---------At Home, doing my own thing------------------------
Tel: +44 161 436 6131                       
   Web: http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/~chl
Email: [email-masked]      Snail: 5 Clerewood Ave, CHEADLE, SK8 3JU, U.K.
PGP: 2C15F1A9      Fingerprint: 73 6D C2 51 93 A0 01 E7 65 E8 64 7E 14 A4 AB A5