On Mon, Apr 27, 2015 at 12:06:18PM -0700, Phillip Carroll wrote:
> On 4/27/2015 8:10 AM, Viktor Dukhovni wrote:
> >...The only acceptable alternative
> >representation that comes to mind is a table of ascii-only addresses
> >explicitly configured for senders in the MSA's local domains, that
> >are accepted on the reverse path as valid addresses for these same
> >senders. With that, you could encode sender addresses when forwarding
> >ascii-only recipients to non-EAI systems (or sending email to
> >recipients in the same domains for which ascii-only forms exist).
>
> Viktor, I would not define the scheme that you describe as "encoding".
> Instead, I see that as merely an example of a particular form of local
> address aliasing. Aliasing, for whatever purpose, is a matter of purely
> local concern. Using that definition, the prohibition against encoding any
> local parts has no need of exceptions of any kind.
Yes, that's the basic idea. Indeed this is more along the lines
of aliasing or canonicalization, than "encoding".
--
Viktor.
