--On Friday, February 27, 2009 16:04 +0100 Arnt Gulbrandsen
"SHOULD doaddress lookups case-insensitively", IMHO, doesn't
belong in an architecture document.
Do you think it's fair for another RFC to say "MUST do
case-insensitive matching of local-parts" if the email-arch
RFC says "globally opaque and [...] to be interpreted only by
the entity specified by the address's domain name"?
This is one of many examples of why I'm concerned about putting
this document on the standards track. 2821/5321 says that these
are case sensitive but that depending on that is a bad idea (and
doesn't say it in those words). Any statement that is not
_exactly_ the same as what 5321 says will be taken by someone as
contradicting that document and make our situation worse, not
better, even if only slightly so. And a statement that is
identical to what 5321 says will prevent improvements in that
text for 5321bis (or introduce the same confusion).
As an Informational document with appropriate disclaimers, I
have few or not issues with it. But, as a standards-track one,
I think a whole new level of consistency checks with the
ever-moving targets of existing specs is needed.