Subject: [EAI] ISSUE: smtpext-08 3..5

From: "Frank Ellermann" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 24 Sep 2007 19:03:19 +0200

As John and others have noted, chapters 3..5 are somewhat odd.

The I-D isn't about POP3, LMTP, IMAP, DSNs, MIME, or 2822upd,
it's about ESMTP with the UTF8SMTP and should focus on this.´

As an editorial point about section 4:  The subsection 4.1 is
an orphan, there's no 4.2.

Substantial point about a remark in section 5:

| It is notable in an internationalization context that there
| is a long history on some systems of using overstruck ASCII
| characters (a character, a backspace, and another character)
| within a quoted string to approximate non-ASCII characters.

I've never seen this, maybe it's limited to communities where
the Latin-1 subset of Unicode isn't the predominant charset.

| This form of internationalization SHOULD be phased out as
| this extension becomes widely deployed

Using NO-WS-CTL anywhere in a message header should be phased
out a.s.a.p. in 2822upd.  That's no job for EAI, let alone
this I-D.

| backward-compatibility considerations require that it
| continue to be supported.

At the moment 2822upd still allows NO-WS-CTL.  In the "worst"
(for the *alleged* backward compatibility) case it could say
"MUST accept, MUST NOT generate" moving NO-WS-CTL wholesale
to its obs-cenity section.

 Frank

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

---

From: John C Klensin <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 24 Sep 2007 13:33:54 -0400

> the Latin-1 subset of Unicode isn't the predominant charset.

It is limited to communities where eight-bit character sets
haven't taken off, or before they had taken off.  If you have
ever wondered why the backspace character in Unix and
U**x-derived systems is non-destructive, you have seen the
symptoms.   But, as with the material in Sections 3-5, it is not
clear that the comments belong in this document.
 
>...
    john

---

From: "Frank Ellermann" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 24 Sep 2007 19:56:04 +0200

John C Klensin wrote:

 [Interesting (ab)uses of BS]
> ever wondered why the backspace character in Unix and U**x-
> derived systems is non-destructive, you have seen the symptoms.

Well, I know the trick in conjunction with documents sent to
a printer, and I know "less" to view such documents without a
printer.

But I've never seen that anybody went so far to use this trick
in the local part of an e-mail address.  

> as with the material in Sections 3-5, it is not clear that
> the comments belong in this document.

+1  Maybe the EAI WG could petition the 2822upd and 2821bis
authors to get rid of NO-WS-CTL as far as possible... <gd&r>

---

From: Harald Alvestrand <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 27 Sep 2007 15:20:29 +0200

I've assigned #1506 to discussions about the substantial content of 
sections 3-5 that do not affect the protocol in any substantial way.