During the UASG Workshop yesterday, there was discussion about reachability vs adherence to the standards. As I understand it… Non-EAI mail supports ascii only in the mailbox name and the domain name. A mail application can convert an IDN domain name to ascii through the Punycode conversion process before the message goes ‘out on the wire’, so it should arrive where it’s expected even though it may not look like it ‘should’ (punycode instead of the IDN) But, what about the mailbox name? If it is in Unicode and the message is sent to a non-EAI mail platform, will the message be rejected? Will it just disappear? Is this good practice? Coremail, at our workshop in Marakesh, told us that if the receiving mail system does NOT support EAI, then they convert the Unicode mailbox name into an ASCII name which they alias in their mail environment - so any replies will go to the original unicode mailbox. Is this another one of those instances that would benefit from community discussion? Don Don Hollander Universal Acceptance Steering Group Skype: don_hollander
In EAI protocol designs, it assumes that all major email service providers will be upgraded to support EAI. I think that adherence to the IETF standards is very important. Jiankang Yao From: Don Hollander Date: 2016-11-04 10:39 To: ua-eai@icann.org Subject: [UA-EAI] Reachability vs Standards During the UASG Workshop yesterday, there was discussion about reachability vs adherence to the standards. As I understand it… Non-EAI mail supports ascii only in the mailbox name and the domain name. A mail application can convert an IDN domain name to ascii through the Punycode conversion process before the message goes ‘out on the wire’, so it should arrive where it’s expected even though it may not look like it ‘should’ (punycode instead of the IDN) But, what about the mailbox name? If it is in Unicode and the message is sent to a non-EAI mail platform, will the message be rejected? Will it just disappear? Is this good practice? Coremail, at our workshop in Marakesh, told us that if the receiving mail system does NOT support EAI, then they convert the Unicode mailbox name into an ASCII name which they alias in their mail environment - so any replies will go to the original unicode mailbox. Is this another one of those instances that would benefit from community discussion? Don Don Hollander Universal Acceptance Steering Group Skype: don_hollander _______________________________________________ UA-EAI mailing list UA-EAI@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ua-eai
Thanks Yao. What do people do until ‘…all major email service providers…” are upgraded. And, do you have any sense of how you will measure such success? Once 10 billion email addresses under management are achieved? Don From: Jiankang Yao <yaojk@cnnic.cn> Reply-To: yaojk <yaojk@cnnic.cn> Date: Friday, 4 November 2016 at 9:16 PM To: Don Hollander <don.hollander@icann.org>, "ua-eai@icann.org" <ua-eai@icann.org> Subject: Re: [UA-EAI] Reachability vs Standards In EAI protocol designs, it assumes that all major email service providers will be upgraded to support EAI. I think that adherence to the IETF standards is very important. Jiankang Yao From: Don Hollander Date: 2016-11-04 10:39 To: ua-eai@icann.org Subject: [UA-EAI] Reachability vs Standards During the UASG Workshop yesterday, there was discussion about reachability vs adherence to the standards. As I understand it… Non-EAI mail supports ascii only in the mailbox name and the domain name. A mail application can convert an IDN domain name to ascii through the Punycode conversion process before the message goes ‘out on the wire’, so it should arrive where it’s expected even though it may not look like it ‘should’ (punycode instead of the IDN) But, what about the mailbox name? If it is in Unicode and the message is sent to a non-EAI mail platform, will the message be rejected? Will it just disappear? Is this good practice? Coremail, at our workshop in Marakesh, told us that if the receiving mail system does NOT support EAI, then they convert the Unicode mailbox name into an ASCII name which they alias in their mail environment - so any replies will go to the original unicode mailbox. Is this another one of those instances that would benefit from community discussion? Don Don Hollander Universal Acceptance Steering Group Skype: don_hollander _______________________________________________ UA-EAI mailing list UA-EAI@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ua-eai
From: Don Hollander Date: 2016-11-04 16:52 To: yaojk; ua-eai@icann.org Subject: Re: [UA-EAI] Reachability vs Standards
Thanks Yao.
What do people do until ‘…all major email service providers…” are upgraded.
push them to upgrade their service.
And, do you have any sense of how you will measure such success? Once 10 billion email addresses under management are achieved?
in current stage, I think that the following may be a criteria. how many email service providers have been upgraded to support eai? how many clients/servers have supported EAI? in next stage, may be " 10 billion email addresses under management are achieved with EAI" Jiankang Yao
Don
From: Jiankang Yao <yaojk@cnnic.cn> Reply-To: yaojk <yaojk@cnnic.cn> Date: Friday, 4 November 2016 at 9:16 PM To: Don Hollander <don.hollander@icann.org>, "ua-eai@icann.org" <ua-eai@icann.org> Subject: Re: [UA-EAI] Reachability vs Standards
participants (2)
-
Don Hollander -
Jiankang Yao