Cisco Firewalling method is likely to not know about SMTPUTF8, and as they do deep packet inspection, they are likely to reject packets. We need to find a contact there.

On Mon, Apr 17, 2017 at 10:26 AM, Mark Svancarek via UA-EAI <ua-eai@icann.org> wrote:

Mark’s notes:

 

  • Anti-spam providers should also be engaged.  For example, a bug found recently in EAI support within EOP (the protection service within Office 365) is the reason that EAI support for Exchange Online (EXO) is currently disabled.
  • Creating ‘rules’ for aliases is an important feature for both software and service providers.
  • We should be willing to create Informational RFCs and defend them.
  • Types of things we can put forward in an informational RFC:
    • Adding a bootstrap alias to the body of a message
    • Dealing with aliases may be script-specific
    • Determining rules and formats for NDR messages
    • How to handle when email address looks like EAI (e.g. Unicode@Unicode) but the UTF8 declaration is missing
    • What to do when local part contains ACE prefix (i.e. “xn—“) and when remainder is compatible with Punycode transformation
    • When to normalize local parts (consensus was that we shouldn’t ever change local parts, so this informational would just be a documentation of that consensus)
  • Normalization can modify digital signatures
  • Suggestions to mailbox providers regarding which Unicode compositions are preferred
  • Different providers handle messages sent to multiple senders differently.
  • Shodun search engine may provide insight.
  • About 10% of XIM deployments are supporting EAI.  That seems bad, but actually at the rate of uptake of those patches, it will be 50+% in 3 years.
  • I think we agreed that we would advocate for IDNA2008 with compatibility mode to prevent spoofing of German, Greek and Cyrillic – but actually not sure if we got consensus or not
  • Since reputation if the current approach to anti-malware (as opposed to blocklisting), we should be testing SPF/DKIM.
  • Local networks can be a problem (anecdote about hotel breaking SMTPUTF8)
  • I wrote that there is an “EAI ambiguity” in the RFC 5228 Sieve, but I didn’t capture the nature of the ambiguity…

 

Mark’s action items:

  • Clarify is sending-to is currently supported differently than receiving-from in EXO.  This would be a transient issue (since support is nominally disabled for both at this time) but it is interesting to investigate.
  • Get Outlook bugs in Thailand from Throughwave and my local contact there
  • Contact Terry Zink (Microsoft EOP) and see if he can represent UASG/EAI in Lisbon Jun 12th.

 

From: ua-eai-bounces@icann.org [mailto:ua-eai-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Don Hollander
Sent: Saturday, April 15, 2017 5:57 PM
To: ua-eai@icann.org
Subject: [UA-EAI] Draft Notes

 

Please find attached my draft notes rom the EAI Meting.

 

Please advise of any suggested changes

 

Don


_______________________________________________
UA-EAI mailing list
UA-EAI@icann.org
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ua-eai