Subject: [EAI] Two issues of EAI drafts

From: Yangwoo Ko <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2006 03:20:59 +0900

Dear EAI DT members,

After reading I-Ds, I came up with a few issues that need to
be addressed soon.

(1) String preparation

We are using Stringprep with Nameprep profile IDNA while
POP draft proposes to use SASLprep profile. In addition,
John mentioned this morning that we are going to have more
stable normalization table soon.

Is it better to have same preparation rules for both local and
domain part? If yes, what should be that preparation rule?

(2) Association of an I18N email address and its ALT-address

For sender-based operations (e.g. spam protection based on
sender information), an I18N email address needs to be handled
as if it is "equivalent" to its ALT-address.

What do we mean by "equivalent"? How can be enforce such
an equivalence?

Regards

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

---

From: John C Klensin <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 10 Jul 2006 16:16:07 -0400

> domain part? If yes, what should be that preparation rule?

Whether it is better or not is not interesting.  It is not 
possible.  IDNA requires a particular profile, one that in 
particular performs case-folding for non-ASCII characters where 
that is relevant.   The left side requires a profile that 
preserves case if the general norms of RFC 821 -> RFC 2821 are 
to be followed.

> What do we mean by "equivalent"? How can be enforce such

I do not believe that is going to be possible in the general 
case and the statement may not be true... although it is nice to 
wish for.

     john