In message <462DE5E3(_dot_)2A82(_at_)xyzzy(_dot_)claranet(_dot_)de>, Frank Ellermann
Pete Resnick wrote:
All of those have surrounding CFWS.
That's why 2821bis should stay away from using similar terms
like <Atom>, there are no comments and no line folding in the
envelope. For <Mailbox> any attempt to clean it up is likely
too late, but it deserves a note in 2821bis that <Mailbox> is
syntactically very different from <mailbox>.
If we wish to distinguish between <mailbox> and <Mailbox> then we ought
to use different names, not just different case. From RFC4234 ABNF:
2.1. Rule Naming
Rule names are case-insensitive
Paul Overell Internet Platform Development Manager, Thus plc
Description: PGP signature