Keith "Codec" Moore wrote:
my comment wasn't about your document - it was about the idea that
we should define a new message format rather than try to solve
known problems.
We are both trying to solve known problems, we are just taking different
approaches. I would hope that you would recognize that I am trying to take
the long-view by advocating a message format and protocol that addresses
the multiple roots of the multiple known problems. All of the evidence
shows that codec-based cures introduce additional interoperability
failures of their own, so I don't see them as being anything other than
short-term patches.
To wit, 2047_Group:idna; is likely to malfunction for the majority of the
mailers, just based on the the known implementation problems with 2047 and
Group addresses, even without adding another codec. If you know of another
way to solve all three of these problems without defining a unified syntax
as part of a new message, I'd love to hear about it.
--
Eric A. Hall http://www.ehsco.com/
Internet Core Protocols http://www.oreilly.com/catalog/coreprot/