Subject: FAX= in ORCPT

From: "Cancio, Vivian" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 12:48:25 -0700

It appears that we need to add some clarification in the Implementers Guide
with regards to the text in Section 2.3 of RFC 2298 and Section 5 of RFC
1891. See below.
I was brought to my attention that the interpretation of this text and the
representation of "=" (as in FAX=) in the ORCPT parameter might be an issue.

Is there any doubt that "FAX=" should be represented in the ORCPT parameter
as FAX+3D?

Vivian

---

From: Hiroshi Tamura <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2000 08:46:58 +0900 (JST)

Yes, clarification is better.

> with regards to the text in Section 2.3 of RFC 2298 and Section 5 of RFC

OK. 

A simple question. Why does this rule apply to ONLY optional header and
additional parameters?

I hope this question does not cause repetitive discussion in the past.

> Is there any doubt that "FAX=" should be represented in the ORCPT parameter

According to the rule, it is right. But, .....

We have an interworking report on RFC2304.
Toyoda-san,
did you use ORCPT in the test?

Regards,
--
Hiroshi Tamura, Ricoh Company, LTD.
E-mail: [email-masked]

---

From: "Toyoda, Kiyoshi" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2000 13:53:44 +0900

>did you use ORCPT in the test?

We didn't use ORCPT parameter in our test.

I think "FAX=" must be encoded according to RFC1891 if you use ORCPT 
parameter. But, I think it isn't issue because "=" can appear in any 
e-mail address. 

Kiyoshi Toyoda

---

From: Claudio Allocchio <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2000 10:12:18 +0100

> parameter. But, I think it isn't issue because "=" can appear in any 

Correct... As we already discussed privately, there is a need for general 
clarification on the issue. 

In realy the '=' ASCII char is in use 'as is', in local-part (see RFC822)
since years and is in production also since years: See the whole MIXER
specification (RFC 2156) and all the MIXER existing and interworking 
implementations which encode X.400 addresses as

  /C=it/A=garr/P=garr/S=Allocchio/G=Claudio/@cosine-gw.infn.it

I'll be back with a detailed "clarification proposal" in the next message!

regards,
Claudio

---

From: Claudio Allocchio <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2000 12:05:34 +0100

Hallo Vivian and all,

> representation of "=" (as in FAX=) in the ORCPT parameter might be an issue.

I will try in the following to clarify the question.

As we all know, there are ENVELOPE (SMTP - RFC821) and HEADER (RFC822) fields
to deal with.

The RFC822 header fields for "originator" (From:, Sender:) and "recipient"
(To:, Cc:, Bcc:) and similar fields (Reply-To:,...) contain the 
definition of the machine usable address, where local-part is defined
as allowing the '=' character. 

The RFC821 'MAIL FROM' and 'RCPT TO' fields allow also the '=' char inside
the <reverse-path> and <forward-path> elements.

The RFC1891 ORCPT paramter in ESMTP, being a parameter made by

  esmtp-parameter  ::= esmtp-keyword ["=" esmtp-value]

MUST NOT contain the '=' sign in esmtp-value.

I think a written example can simplify anything.

 ESMTP Envelope commands:

 MAIL FROM:<[email-masked]>
 RCPT TO:<FAX=[email-masked]> ORCPT=[email-masked]

Thus the possible text for the implementers guide could be:

------------------------- begin ------------------------------------

 The GSTN addresses in e-mail addresses specifications (currently RFC2303, 
 RFC2304 and RFC2846) require the use of the "=" and "+" characters inside
 the local-part (see RFC822) and forward-path and reverse-path (see RFC821)
 of the address. In these fields the "=" and "+" characters are allowed and
 thus they MUST NOT be encoded in any way. Also other message headers fields
 extensions (like Original-Recipient, see RFC2298) allows these characters
 which thus MUST NOT be encoded.

 However GSTN addresses can also appear in other fields, and in particular 
 inside ESMTP parameters as esmtp-value (see RFC1651); the ORCPT parameter
 (see RFC1891) is one of such cases. When the "=" and "+" characters in 
 GSTN addresses appear as esmtp-value, they MUST be encoded as hexchar 
 (see RFC1891).

 In particular, the same GSTN address could require different behaviour 
 inside the same ESMTP command line:

  RCPT TO:<FAX=[email-masked]> ORCPT=[email-masked]

------------------------- end ------------------------------------

regards,
Claudio

---

From: Hiroshi Tamura <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 31 Aug 2000 18:33:05 +0900 (JST)

Small correction.

>  inside ESMTP parameters as esmtp-value (see RFC1651); the ORCPT parameter
                                                  ^^^^
                                                  1869

RFC 1651 is obsolete.

Regards,

---

From: Claudio Allocchio <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 31 Aug 2000 14:21:23 +0100

> Small correction.

yes, you're right!

thank you!
Claudio