John C Klensin wrote:
Your diligence in finding these things and tracking them
down continues to amaze me.
It was really completely unrelated to 2821bis, a discussion
with Jukka about UNKNOWN-8BIT and the W3C validator:
<http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.org.w3c.validator/9194>
After I stumbled over it I thought that CONVERT might be
relevant for 2821bis, it's also (remotely) related to some
recent EAI discussions.
(1) 1428 is, indeed, ancient history.
Good.
since 821 defined <opt-info> as precisely
[<via>] [<with>] [<id>] [<for>]
terminated in a semicolon, it is not clear where additional
clauses go. Conversely, if additional clauses really are
common practice and multiple addresses in <for> are not,
then we should perhaps fix 2821bis so that Opt-info is
[Via] [With] [ID] [For] [Additional-registered-clauses]
"For" is restricted to a single Mailbox (or Path), and
Additional-registered-clauses is given a strict name-value
syntax.
"IFF multiple addresses in <for> are not". I can't judge it.
In theory I could try to check the mails I have, but that's
not much. I'd bet that I've never got any CONVERT, but I'd
also bet that I've seen some rather odd timestamp lines.
(3) If we are going to push through as document that defines
and creates one or more additional IANA registries in this
space (see draft-hansen-4468upd-mailesc-registry), it would
probably be wise to define as many of the SMTP-related
registries as possible.
If that means that you'll add a normative reference to Tony's
I-D in -04, because you expect that it will be finished and
approved before 2821bis, it's fine. For these obscure trace
clauses it would depend on how fast you expect an answer for
the "IFF"-question.
You could also get away with a paragraph in the IANA section:
| The timestamp clauses FROM, BY, VIA, WITH, ID, and FOR as
| defined in this document form an initial registry of such
| clauses, adding CONVERT defined in RFC 1428 as deprecated.
|
| Additional clauses have to be specified in standards track
| RFCs, and IANA is asked to maintain a registry of such
| clauses with pointers to the RFCs specifying the details
| on the order of their publication. The initial registry is:
|
| FROM RFC xxxx
| BY RFC xxxx
| VIA RFC xxxx
| WITH RFC xxxx
| ID RFC xxxx
| FOR RFC xxxx
| CONVERT RFC 1428 (deprecated)
If there are more "grandfathered" clauses this could deserve
its own I-D.
Frank