Are we sure that the proposed changes would not require re-cycling RFC2822 at
Proposed Standard?
d/
Pete Resnick wrote:
There appears to be a good contingent that is willing to limit the
generate syntax for message id's to dot-atoms on the left of the "@" and
domain-name- or domain-literal- looking things on the right. This would
not change the *interpret* (obs-) syntax which would still require
interpreting quoted-strings on the left. So, scream now or forever hold
your peace on the following:
- Define the left hand side of the "@" in msg-id to be (dot-atom-text /
ob-id-left)
- Leave the right hand side of msg-id as it is (dot-atom-text /
no-fold-literal / obs-id-right)
- Leave the text to normatively RECOMMEND (or should it be REQUIRE?)
that the right hand side be a domain identifier (either domain name or
domain literal)
I'd prefer to leave the ABNF of domain-literal the way it is and limit
in the text. We've already got examples of having to unlimit Received
because of bugs in 2822 and so that fixes in 2821bis could be
accommodated; I'd rather leave it to other documents to define what it
is to be a valid "domain identifier." (Remember, you've got to interpret
all of the mess anyway, so the only thing that putting it into the ABNF
would do is reinforce the requirement in the text.)
I'd also be inclined to *not* talk about case-sensitivity and
comparisons since nowhere is it discussed in 2822.
pr
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net