Brandon,
See Hector's note and, if you have the energy to read it, the
rather long one I'll post when I get through proofreading,
probably in the next hour or two.
However, as I read RFC 2026, _any_ substantive change from the
Draft Standard 5321 that has not gone through Proposed Standard
in a separate document first takes the 5321bis document.
AFAICT, there is no exception there that allows introducing a
substantive change that would cause some existing conforming
implementations to become non-conforming and still have the
document move to Internet Standard, even if that change has been
widely implemented by large email providers.
john
--On Monday, November 25, 2019 13:10 -0800 Brandon Long
<blong(_at_)google(_dot_)com> wrote:
On Sun, Nov 24, 2019 at 3:35 AM Alessandro Vesely
<vesely(_at_)tana(_dot_)it> wrote:
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.
Where?
[... 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 From: 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.
Brandon
_______________________________________________
ietf-smtp mailing list
ietf-smtp(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-smtp