[CC +PKIX]
I greatly appreciate the cross posting in the parent, as I didn't realize
there was a large body of work already developed in DANE on interpreting
the email address local-part.
Not really. There have been two drafts in DANE, one for storing PGP keys
in the DNS, and one for S/MIME keys, and the authors have consistently
ignored advice from the SMTP community that what they are doing is a bad
idea and how to minimize the damage.
I would agree that it would be very helpful to create a compatible email
canonicalization or mapping scheme.
As I said a few messages ago, it is not an accident or a mistake that
there is no canonical form for e-mail addresses. We understand why some
people wish it were otherwise, but the number of ways that MTAs map e-mail
addresses is only slightly less than the number of MTAs, and the mappings
are constantly changing.
It may be possible to figure out a way to use an SMTP server or maybe a
web server connected to an SMTP server as an oracle, to ask do these two
addresses deliver to the same place or to ask for a key or a certificate
for an address, but even that is iffy.
We can't even say what it means for two addresses to be "the same". For
example, on my MTA there about a thousand live addresses that deliver to
the same inbox where your message was delivered, but that doesn't mean I
want all of them to have the same PGP or S/MIME keys.
R's,
John
_______________________________________________
ietf-smtp mailing list
ietf-smtp(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-smtp