In article <[email protected]> you write: >> The intention in 8601 is pretty clear, even though the ABNF doesn't agree: > >Yes, the RFC says the authserv-id can contain UTF-8, but its author >stated that he intended it to be "either a plain old ASCII domain name >or an A-label". One does not need UTF-8 for that. If authserv-id were not > >> authserv-id = value > >but > >> authserv-id = token ; token from RFC2045 > >wouldn't the author's intent have been covered as well, without any >reference to RFC6531/6532?
You'll have to ask Murray what he meant, although as we've seen section 2.5 specifically says that an EAI authserv-id "may be expressed in UTF-8." In an EAI message, an A-R header has to allow UTF-8 characters in mailboxes, so it might as well allow them in other places including domain names and the authserv-id. R's, John PS: for anyone who might suggest one could "punycode" a mailbox, don't even think about it. _______________________________________________ dmarc mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc
