Thanks Mark.

I think that there’s some confusion in similar terms.  A-Label, U-Label; Punycode/Unicode;   I think we need to get that clearer too.

And the issue of taking the mailbox name and putting it through a punycode conversion.

I’m keen for more comments, please.

Don

From: Mark Svancarek <marksv@microsoft.com>
Date: Wednesday, 14 December 2016 at 2:52 PM
To: Don Hollander <don.hollander@icann.org>, Dennis Tan <dtantanaka@verisign.com>
Cc: "ua-eai@icann.org" <ua-eai@icann.org>
Subject: RE: [UA-EAI] [Ext] Quick Guide to EAI

Pardon me for my very, very late feedback.

• Overall, it looks great.
• I still have mixed feelings about advising to transmit the domain name portion as A-label.  
• I guess I’d feel better if we suggested transmitting domain name as A-label *if* the mailbox isn’t a U-Label.
• Here’s something I thought about last week at IGF, but didn’t have time to discuss.  I think we should add a section for email service provers to consider (following the section for developers to consider):
• Only offer mailbox names which conform to the domain name label generation rules for the selected script.  Such names are guaranteed to be compatible with the Punycode algorithm. 
• These email addresses can easily be shared by users with their friends and colleagues who do not use their same writing method; the colleague or friend can address email to such an address, or create an address book entry, using the A-label format. 
• Upon use, the client MUA software should convert the A-Label to the appropriate U-Label, at which point the friend or colleague will possess the EAI formatted email address despite not having a keyboard or IME which supports the target script.

/marksv

From: ua-eai-bounces@icann.org [mailto:ua-eai-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Don Hollander
Sent: Tuesday, December 13, 2016 3:27 PM
To: dtantanaka@verisign.com
Cc: ua-eai@icann.org
Subject: Re: [UA-EAI] [Ext] Quick Guide to EAI

Thanks Dennis.

Sometimes its easier to see stuff when it’s in its final form.

Looking forward to other comments.

Don

On 14/12/2016, at 10:39 AM, Tan Tanaka, Dennis <dtantanaka@verisign.com> wrote:

Don,

Some comments:

1. In the example, under “username” it is suggested that “punycode” (i.e. xn--abc123) is acceptable. IMO, this is wrong. I’m almost sure the protocol doesn’t require this.

2. Same thing for second-level and top-level domains. We should not encourage software to display the A-label to end users. A-label is for the wire. Users should see only the U-label. After all , UA is about processing and displaying domain names in a proper manner.

3. EAI is about Unicode, so not sure why the “ASCII or Unicode” bullet points. This can be interpreted that ASCII-only email addresses are EAI too.

4. Since we are mentioning the idea of an authoritative list of TLDs, we should point the reader where to find one.

My two quick cents,

Dennis

From: <ua-eai-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of Don Hollander <don.hollander@icann.org>
Date: Tuesday, December 13, 2016 at 3:48 PM
To: "ua-eai@icann.org" <ua-eai@icann.org>
Subject: [EXTERNAL] [UA-EAI] Quick Guide to EAI

Dear all:

Here’s the finished (I hope) product – Quick Guide to EAI.

Can you please review and provide comments (including endorsement) by the end of this week?

Thanks.

Don

Don Hollander

Universal Acceptance Steering Group

Skype: don_hollander