Skip to main content

Internationalized Email Headers
draft-ietf-eai-utf8headers-12

Yes

(Chris Newman)

No Objection

(Cullen Jennings)
(Dan Romascanu)
(David Ward)
(Mark Townsley)
(Pasi Eronen)
(Ron Bonica)
(Tim Polk)

Note: This ballot was opened for revision 12 and is now closed.

Chris Newman Former IESG member
Yes
Yes () Unknown

                            
Cullen Jennings Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection () Unknown

                            
Dan Romascanu Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection () Unknown

                            
David Ward Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection () Unknown

                            
Lars Eggert Former IESG member
(was Discuss) No Objection
No Objection (2008-06-30) Unknown
draft-ietf-eai-utf8headers, Section 4.3., paragraph 21:
>    [NOTE IN DRAFT: If any header needs to be restricted to disallow
>    this, please raise the issue on the mailing list.]

  Remove note for publication as an RFC.


draft-ietf-eai-smtpext, INTRODUCTION, paragraph 10:
> Abstract

  Should briefly describe what it updates in RFCs 4952, 2821 and 2822.


draft-ietf-eai-smtpext, Section 3.7.3., paragraph 7:
>    [[anchor10: Note: The FOR parameter has been changed to match the
>    definition in RFC2821bis, permitting only one address in the For
>    clause.  The group working on that document reached mailing list
>    consensus that the syntax in RFC 2821 that permitted more than one
>    address was simply a mistake.]]

  Doesn't look like a note to the RFC Editor - remove?
Magnus Westerlund Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection (2008-07-03) Unknown
I think the ABNF could be improved and be made easier to verify. I know there are a lot of baggage in the ABNF usage in RFC 2821. However, I think the following improvements could be done:

1. putting in rulenames for the rules that didn't have name in RFC 2821, like for VRFY and MAILTO. Otherwise you are not really having correct ABNF. 

2. Put in the equivalent of import clause for different rules. What I mean is that for a rule defined in another document, like "atext"

atext = <See section 3.2.4 of RFC 2822>

That way a reader know where it is comming. It will also not show up as undefined in parsing. Thus allowing one to easier verify the real undefines from the ones that are imported from other documents.
Mark Townsley Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection () Unknown

                            
Pasi Eronen Former IESG member
(was Discuss) No Objection
No Objection () Unknown

                            
Ron Bonica Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection () Unknown

                            
Tim Polk Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection () Unknown