[idn] Re: 7 bits forever!

["Eric A. Hall" <ehall@ehsco.com>]

[cc trimmed]

Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu wrote:

> Why is this important?  Well.. think about this message.  I may have
> an 8-bit-clean mailer.  You may have one.  But neither of us has the
> authority to make sure that the software at ietf.org is able to deal.

WRT to your comments in particular, I agree that SMTP has the most
difficulties. However, as stated, if something cannot be extended it can
still be replaced. And in the meantime, IDNA should be there as a fallback
position for these kinds of protocols.

I mean, considering all of the problems that SMTP has -- sender forgeries,
relay forgeries, lack of end-to-end integrity, and of course a lack of
support for i18n email addresses -- it seems likely to be a candidate for
replacement for other reasons anyway. That doesn't mean that the IDN tail
should wag SMTP, but if SMTP cannot be upgraded, well, add that to the
list of other things that SMTP doesn't do very well. In this regard, the
IDN issue is just one of many that need to be considered (i18n mailbox
names being another).

-- 
Eric A. Hall                                        http://www.ehsco.com/
Internet Core Protocols          http://www.oreilly.com/catalog/coreprot/