From: regext <regext-boun...@ietf.org> On Behalf Of Dmitry Belyavsky Sent: Monday, October 12, 2020 8:11 AM To: Thomas Corte (TANGO support) <thomas.co...@knipp.de> Cc: regext@ietf.org Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [regext] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-belyavskiy-epp-eai-01.txt
Well, On Mon, Oct 12, 2020 at 2:47 PM Thomas Corte (TANGO support) <thomas.co...@knipp.de<mailto:thomas.co...@knipp.de>> wrote: Hello, On 10/11/20 13:39, Dmitry Belyavsky wrote: > Dear colleagues, > > Here is the updated version of the draft describing the usage of the > Internationalized Email Addresses (EAI) in the EPP protocol. > This version provides a specification to submit EAI to the registries via > the EPP protocol extension. > > Any feedback is welcomed! As James already pointed out, I'm not sure why the extension is even necessary to accomplish this on a purely technical (protocol) level. eppcom:minTokenType is based on xsd:token, which is based on xsd:normalizedString and adds whitespace collapsing. Unless that introduces a problem I'm not a aware of, none of this prevents the specification of internationalized e-mail addresses for contacts in EPP; in particular, it doesn't limit the available characters to ASCII. Many registries (like e.g. Neustar for .biz, or the TLDs run by our own TANGO system) already accept them right now. It would be silly to require them to use an extension to do the same in the future. If the registries work this way, it's great but it means they formally violate the EPP protocol. https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5733#section-2.6<https://secure-web.cisco.com/1hzu_WlPioMsUO-ycVN-zDMofl2fHO7fLFN8tmG0h1ua4fI7qT4zfOJ3Y4VH3VasUchmJp8BP_rL5zVbgz5Qjdgw93z2s0rn5IOSMAy_ZGBXuMk3s8B3BMGX0d8hicT9dyXOwlkRQnFmzwIgpA5BOd8sbnrlbrKbu8SEciN4EpA5mkN5hpMIjviWULHfq6XuWUUJrZz-20koRV6ebQtU1N9ikjlyYDg1KrqYVSBJlGWY4zva7EQYi3axiAgOibVz7qgLgS7n5UOVj0nDXOzZNApINoxoNmRQDb5ZujVAoo1c/https%3A%2F%2Ftools.ietf.org%2Fhtml%2Frfc5733%23section-2.6> denotes: Email address syntax is defined in [RFC5322]. This mapping does not prescribe minimum or maximum lengths for character strings used to represent email addresses. EAI addresses do not fit the RFC 5322. The 1st version of the draft was basically replacing RFC 5322 to RFC 6530 :) [SAH] Perhaps there’s a case to be made for RFC 6530 being an update to RFC 5322. I’m going to see if I can run some tests to confirm it, but I, too, suspect that EPP as-is won’t have any issues with internationalized email addresses. Scott
_______________________________________________ regext mailing list regext@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/regext
