On 2025-01-13 11:08, Viktor Dukhovni via Postfix-users wrote: > > No. That is not a valid email address, despite the fact that the domain > part of the addres is a valid DNS name. The RFC5321 syntax requires > a "dot-atom" for the domain part, and in a "dot-atom" all the dots > are *internal*. No leading trailing or consecutive dots are allowed.
I see "dot-string", but only for local-part. The actual domain format restriction (compared to RFC 1035) seem to be implicit: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc5321#section-4.1.2 Domain = sub-domain *("." sub-domain) sub-domain = Let-dig [Ldh-str] Let-dig = ALPHA / DIGIT Ldh-str = *( ALPHA / DIGIT / "-" ) Let-dig Mailbox = Local-part "@" ( Domain / address-literal ) Local-part = Dot-string / Quoted-string Dot-string = Atom *("." Atom) Atom = 1*atext https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc5321#section-2.3.11: "The two terms [address and mailbox are typically used interchangeably unless the distinction [...] is important". I see no _explicit_ deviations from RFC 1035: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc5321#section-2.3.5 which makes me wonder, if the RFC 5321 authors were aware what a "label" in domain means... "In the case of a top-level domain used by itself in an email address, a single string is used without any dots." - I dare to claim that they were not and this limitation comes solely from misinformation; otherwise they should have stated this explicitly. _______________________________________________ Postfix-users mailing list -- postfix-users@postfix.org To unsubscribe send an email to postfix-users-le...@postfix.org
