On 3/1/10 1:24 AM, Dave CROCKER wrote:
This is perhaps more relevant to a discussion about interoperability testing,
but I thought it worth raising also for the next round of specification, etc.
work:
Do we know whether DKIM works IDNs? If not, what should we do about that?
Not only will DKIM need to contend with RFC 3490 and RFC 3492
conventions for puny-code, but also conditionally apply RFC 5242 and
Unicode Technical Report #36, http://www.unicode.org/reports/tr36/ rule
sets. The SMTP experimental conventions established by RFC 5336 expects
these fields are handled by humans. Input would represent UTF-8 and not
Puny-code. While IDN for DNS must be converted to xn--<puny-code>
form, friendly displays in email will likely need to be in UTF-8.
With respect to problems for DKIM, it would seem downgrade (Alt-Address)
operation might cause DKIM signatures to be declared non-compliant with
ADSP.
-Doug
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html