I'll have to check this, but it certainly was not intentional in
the DRUMS work. I can see lots of reasons for getting rid of
the other control characters, but none at all for retaining them
and prohibiting space.
john
--On Sunday, 30 December, 2007 00:01 +0300 Alexey Melnikov
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The IESG wrote:
>> The IESG has received a request from an individual submitter
>> to consider the following document:
>>
>> - 'Simple Mail Transfer Protocol '
>> <draft-klensin-rfc2821bis-06.txt> as a Draft Standard
>>
>> The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and
>> solicits final comments on this action. Please send
>> substantive comments to the [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing lists by
>> 2007-12-24. Exceptionally, comments may be sent to
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] instead. In either case, please retain the
>> beginning of the Subject line to allow automated sorting.
>>
> I know that the IETF LC has ended, but I believe the issue is
> important enough and hopefully will be addressed.
> My co-worker has pointed out that RFC 821 allowed for space
> characters (0x20) in local part of email addresses, but RFC
> 2821 and 2821bis don't allow for that:
>
> Local-part = Dot-string / Quoted-string
> ; MAY be case-sensitive
>
> Dot-string = Atom *("." Atom)
>
> Atom = 1*atext
>
> Quoted-string = DQUOTE *qcontent DQUOTE
>
> where qcontent is defined in RFC 2822 as:
>
> qtext = NO-WS-CTL / ; Non white space
> controls
> %d33 / ; The rest of the
> US-ASCII
> %d35-91 / ; characters not
> including "\"
> %d93-126 ; or the quote
> character
>
> qcontent = qtext / quoted-pair
>
> NO-WS-CTL = %d1-8 / ; US-ASCII control
> characters
> %d11 / ; that do not include
> the
> %d12 / ; carriage return,
> line feed,
> %d14-31 / ; and white space
> characters
> %d127
>
> Was this change between RFC 821 and RFC 2821 intentional?
> Prohibition of spaces in quoted parts breaks gatewaying
> to/from X.400 (MIXER, RFC 2156).
>
> Regards,
> Alexey
>
