On Tue 31/Mar/2020 00:38:51 +0200 Murray S. Kucherawy wrote: > On Mon, Mar 30, 2020 at 2:23 PM John Levine <[email protected]> wrote: > >> In article < >> caba8r6ttpateyprsgbwkafzvz4u8v8sn1vptpmlqcia2_+5...@mail.gmail.com> you >> write: >>>-=-=-=-=-=- >>> >>>Hmm, we didn't include this in RFC 8616 either, I could imagine that it >>>should be punycoded also, though it really depends on whether in 6532 or >>>5322. >> >> This is another mistake in the ABNF in 8601. The point of 6532 is >> that with the exception of Message-IDs, any header fields that used to >> be limited to ASCII can now contain UTF-8 printable characters. >> > > Does someone have a fix in mind that could be submitted as an erratum? The > intent was indeed to make the authserv-id either a plain old ASCII domain > name or an A-label which doesn't need quoting. I missed that RFC 6532 > didn't update "value", unfortunately.
That seems to be an RFC 6532 Erratum. By allowing UTF-8 in MIME tokens, we preserve the spirit of RFC 6532, maintain that the definition in RFC 8601 is valid, and the headers reported by the OP turn out to be valid, as they should be, shouldn't they? Best Ale -- _______________________________________________ dmarc mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc
