On Sun, Nov 24, 2019 at 3:35 AM Alessandro Vesely <vesely(_at_)tana(_dot_)it>
On Sat 23/Nov/2019 13:35:00 +0100 John C Klensin wrote:
there is an effort afoot to get revisions to 5321 and 5322 out there.
[... guidelines for extension publishing omitted ...] because there is
about zero chance that anything would be included in a 5321bis that
would force it back to Proposed Standard.
Yet, I think something will have to be said about the now common habit of
rewriting. Section 3.9, Mailing Lists and Aliases, still considers only
rewriting of the envelope from. Reality now differs.
I don't think such changes would imply going back to PS, given the loosely
normative content of that section.
In the same sense, given how common flaunting of the maximum length is
(and for how long that has been going on,
well before 2008), it seems odd to keep promulgating that that's the
standard. I'll bow to John's knowledge of these procedures,
though... I guess sometimes the standard has to say one thing even if
most systems ignore it... so instead of a more realistic
length that we can move to, we get random interop issues... and keep
having to tell folks to disable overly pedantic SMTP firewalls.
The argument that no one is going to want to enter a 500 character
email address is certainly true... but I've also struggled to
understand how one expects folks to enter correctly escaped
local-parts anyways, or what parts of the UI should show
local-parts unescaped vs escaped.
ietf-smtp mailing list