[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

2821 and friends (Re: draft-eastlake-2606bis-00.txt: Suggestions for modifications)

Changing the subject on this particular tangent....
--On torsdag, oktober 20, 2005 16:12:01 +0000 Paul Vixie <paul@vix.com> wrote: 


# hta@[129.241.1.99] is a valid email address. hta@129.241.1.99 isn't.
# Some mailers get it right, some don't.

really?  i know that mailnames used to have to start with non-numeric, but
3com.com asked for a change and got it.  do the current (2821/2822)
railroad diagrams really say that 129.241.1.99 is not a valid mailname?


RFC 2821:

3.6 Domains

  Only resolvable, fully-qualified, domain names (FQDNs) are permitted
  when domain names are used in SMTP.  In other words, names that can
  be resolved to MX RRs or A RRs (as discussed in section 5) are
  permitted, as are CNAME RRs whose targets can be resolved, in turn,
  to MX or A RRs.  Local nicknames or unqualified names MUST NOT be
  used.

.............

4.1.2 Command Argument Syntax

     Domain = (sub-domain 1*("." sub-domain)) / address-literal
     sub-domain = Let-dig [Ldh-str]

     address-literal = "[" IPv4-address-literal /
                           IPv6-address-literal /
                           General-address-literal "]"
           ; See section 4.1.3

     Mailbox = Local-part "@" Domain
Here's where the "hostname" charset restriction occurs too - but no text there about TLDs. 


--
to unsubscribe send a message to namedroppers-request@ops.ietf.org with
the word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.
archive: <http://ops.ietf.org/lists/namedroppers/>