Movatterモバイル変換


[0]ホーム

URL:


[RFC Home] [TEXT|PDF|HTML] [Tracker] [IPR] [Info page]

PROPOSED STANDARD
Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF)                    T. Hansen, Ed.Request for Comments: 6533                             AT&T LaboratoriesObsoletes:5337                                                C. NewmanUpdates:3461,3464,3798,6522                                   OracleCategory: Standards Track                                    A. MelnikovISSN: 2070-1721                                                Isode Ltd                                                           February 2012Internationalized Delivery Status and Disposition NotificationsAbstract   Delivery status notifications (DSNs) are critical to the correct   operation of an email system.  However, the existing Draft Standards   (RFC 3461,RFC 3464,RFC 6522) are presently limited to ASCII text in   the machine-readable portions of the protocol.  This specification   adds a new address type for international email addresses so an   original recipient address with non-ASCII characters can be correctly   preserved even after downgrading.  This also provides updated content   return media types for delivery status notifications and message   disposition notifications to support use of the new address type.   This document extendsRFC 3461,RFC 3464,RFC 3798, andRFC 6522.Status of This Memo   This is an Internet Standards Track document.   This document is a product of the Internet Engineering Task Force   (IETF).  It represents the consensus of the IETF community.  It has   received public review and has been approved for publication by the   Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG).  Further information on   Internet Standards is available inSection 2 of RFC 5741.   Information about the current status of this document, any errata,   and how to provide feedback on it may be obtained athttp://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6533.Hansen, et al.               Standards Track                    [Page 1]

RFC 6533             Internationalized DSN and MDNs        February 2012Copyright Notice   Copyright (c) 2012 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the   document authors.  All rights reserved.   This document is subject toBCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal   Provisions Relating to IETF Documents   (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of   publication of this document.  Please review these documents   carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect   to this document.  Code Components extracted from this document must   include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of   the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as   described in the Simplified BSD License.Table of Contents1.  Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .32.  Conventions Used in This Document  . . . . . . . . . . . . . .33.  UTF-8 Address Type . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .34.  UTF-8 Delivery Status Notifications  . . . . . . . . . . . . .64.1.  The message/global-delivery-status Media Type  . . . . . .64.2.  The message/global Media Type  . . . . . . . . . . . . . .84.3.  The message/global-headers Media Type  . . . . . . . . . .84.4.  Using These Media Types with multipart/report  . . . . . .84.5.  Additional Requirements on SMTP Servers  . . . . . . . . .95.  UTF-8 Message Disposition Notifications  . . . . . . . . . . .96.  IANA Considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .106.1.  UTF-8 Mail Address Type Registration . . . . . . . . . . .106.2.  Update to 'smtp' Diagnostic Type Registration  . . . . . .116.3.  message/global-headers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .116.4.  message/global-delivery-status . . . . . . . . . . . . . .126.5.  message/global-disposition-notification  . . . . . . . . .147.  Security Considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .158.  References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .168.1.  Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .168.2.  Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .17Appendix A.  Changes sinceRFC 5337  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .18Appendix B.  Acknowledgements  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .18Hansen, et al.               Standards Track                    [Page 2]

RFC 6533             Internationalized DSN and MDNs        February 20121.  Introduction   When an email message is transmitted using the SMTPUTF8 [RFC6531]   extension and Internationalized Email Headers [RFC6532], it is   sometimes necessary to return that message or generate a Message   Disposition Notification (MDN) [RFC3798].  As a message sent to   multiple recipients can generate a status and disposition   notification for each recipient, it is helpful if a client can   correlate these notifications based on the recipient address it   provided; thus, preservation of the original recipient is important.   This specification describes how to preserve the original recipient   and updates the MDN and DSN formats to support the new address types.   NOTE: While this specification updates the experimental versions of   this protocol by removing certain constructs (e.g., the "<addr   <addr>>" address syntax is no longer permitted), the name of the   Address Type "UTF-8" and the media type names message/global,   message/global-delivery-status, and message/global-headers have not   been changed.   This specification is a revision of and replacement for [RFC5337].Section 6 of [RFC6530] describes the change in approach between this   specification and the previous version.2.  Conventions Used in This Document   The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",   "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this   document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119].   The formal syntax uses the Augmented Backus-Naur Form (ABNF)   [RFC5234] notation including the core rules defined inAppendix B of   [RFC5234] and the UTF-8 syntax rules inSection 4 of [RFC3629].3.  UTF-8 Address Type   "An Extensible Message Format for Delivery Status Notifications"   [RFC3464] defines the concept of an address type.  The address format   introduced in "Internationalized Email Headers" [RFC6532] is a new   address type.  The syntax for the new address type in the context of   status notifications is specified at the end of this section.   An SMTP [RFC5321] server that advertises both the SMTPUTF8 extension   [RFC6531] and the DSN extension [RFC3461] MUST accept a UTF-8 address   type in the ORCPT parameter including 8-bit UTF-8 characters.  This   address type also includes a 7-bit encoding suitable for use in a   message/delivery-status body part or an ORCPT parameter sent to an   SMTP server that does not advertise SMTPUTF8.Hansen, et al.               Standards Track                    [Page 3]

RFC 6533             Internationalized DSN and MDNs        February 2012   This address type has 3 forms: utf-8-addr-xtext, utf-8-addr-unitext,   and utf-8-address.  Only the first form is 7-bit safe (only uses   ASCII characters [ASCII]).   The utf-8-address form is only suitable for use in newly defined   protocols capable of native representation of 8-bit characters.  That   is, the utf-8-address form MUST NOT be used:   1.  in the ORCPT parameter when the SMTP server doesn't advertise       support for SMTPUTF8 (utf-8-addr-xtext MUST be used instead); or   2.  if the SMTP server supports SMTPUTF8, but the address contains       ASCII characters not permitted in the ORCPT parameter (e.g., the       ORCPT parameter forbids unencoded SP and the '=' character),       (either utf-8-addr-unitext or utf-8-addr-xtext MUST be used       instead); or   3.  in a 7-bit transport environment including a message/       delivery-status "Original-Recipient:" or "Final-Recipient:"       field, (utf-8-addr-xtext MUST be used instead).   The utf-8-address form MAY be used in the ORCPT parameter when the   SMTP server also advertises support for SMTPUTF8 and the address   doesn't contain any ASCII characters not permitted in the ORCPT   parameter.  It SHOULD be used in a message/global-delivery-status   "Original-Recipient:" or "Final-Recipient:" DSN field, or in an   "Original-Recipient:" header field [RFC3798] if the message is a   SMTPUTF8 message.   In addition, the utf-8-addr-unitext form can be used anywhere where   the utf-8-address form is allowed.   When used in the ORCPT parameter, the UTF-8 address type requires   that ASCII CTLs, SP, '\', '+', and '=' be encoded using 'unitext'   encoding (see below).  This is described by the utf-8-addr-xtext and   utf-8-addr-unitext forms in the ABNF below.  The 'unitext' encoding   uses "\x{HEXPOINT}" syntax (EmbeddedUnicodeChar in the ABNF below)   for encoding any Unicode character outside of ASCII range, as well as   for encoding CTLs, SP, '\', '+', and '='.  HEXPOINT is 2 to 6   hexadecimal digits.  This encoding avoids the need to use the xtext   encoding described in [RFC3461], as any ASCII characters that need to   be escaped using xtext encoding never appear in any unitext-encoded   string.  When sending data to a SMTPUTF8-capable server, native UTF-8   characters SHOULD be used instead of the EmbeddedUnicodeChar syntax   described below.  When sending data to an SMTP server that does not   advertise SMTPUTF8, then the EmbeddedUnicodeChar syntax MUST be used   instead of UTF-8.Hansen, et al.               Standards Track                    [Page 4]

RFC 6533             Internationalized DSN and MDNs        February 2012   When the ORCPT parameter is placed in a message/   global-delivery-status "Original-Recipient:" field, the   utf-8-addr-xtext form of the UTF-8 address type SHOULD be converted   to the utf-8-address form (see the ABNF below) by removing the   unitext encoding.  However, if an address is labeled with the UTF-8   address type but does not conform to utf-8 syntax, then it MUST be   copied into the message/global-delivery-status field without   alteration.   The ability to encode characters with the EmbeddedUnicodeChar   encodings should be viewed as a transitional mechanism and avoided   when possible.  It is hoped that as systems lacking support for   SMTPUTF8 become less common over time, these encodings can eventually   be phased out.   In the ABNF below, all productions not defined in this document are   defined inAppendix B of [RFC5234], inSection 4 of [RFC3629], or in   [RFC3464].   utf-8-type-addr     = "utf-8;" utf-8-enc-addr   utf-8-address       = Mailbox     ; Mailbox as defined in [RFC6531].   utf-8-enc-addr      = utf-8-addr-xtext /                         utf-8-addr-unitext /                         utf-8-address   utf-8-addr-xtext    = 1*(QCHAR / EmbeddedUnicodeChar)                         ; 7bit form of utf-8-addr-unitext.                         ; Safe for use in the ORCPT [RFC3461]                         ; parameter even when SMTPUTF8 SMTP                         ; extension is not advertised.   utf-8-addr-unitext  = 1*(QUCHAR / EmbeddedUnicodeChar)                       ; MUST follow utf-8-address ABNF when                       ; dequoted.                       ; Safe for using in the ORCPT [RFC3461]                       ; parameter when SMTPUTF8 SMTP extension                       ; is also advertised.   QCHAR              = %x21-2a / %x2c-3c / %x3e-5b / %x5d-7e                       ; ASCII printable characters except                       ; CTLs, SP, '\', '+', '='.Hansen, et al.               Standards Track                    [Page 5]

RFC 6533             Internationalized DSN and MDNs        February 2012   QUCHAR              = QCHAR / UTF8-2 / UTF8-3 / UTF8-4                       ; ASCII printable characters except                       ; CTLs, SP, '\', '+' and '=', plus                       ; other Unicode characters encoded in UTF-8   EmbeddedUnicodeChar =   %x5C.78 "{" HEXPOINT "}"                       ; starts with "\x"   HEXPOINT = ( ( "0"/"1" ) %x31-39 ) / "10" / "20" /              "2B" / "3D" / "7F" /         ; all xtext-specials              "5C" / (HEXDIG8 HEXDIG) /    ; 2-digit forms              ( NZHEXDIG 2(HEXDIG) ) /     ; 3-digit forms              ( NZDHEXDIG 3(HEXDIG) ) /    ; 4-digit forms excluding              ( "D" %x30-37 2(HEXDIG) ) /  ; ... surrogate              ( NZHEXDIG 4(HEXDIG) ) /     ; 5-digit forms              ( "10" 4*HEXDIG )            ; 6-digit forms              ; represents either "\" or a Unicode code point outside              ; the ASCII repertoire   HEXDIG8             = %x38-39 / "A" / "B" / "C" / "D" / "E" / "F"                       ; HEXDIG excluding 0-7   NZHEXDIG            = %x31-39 / "A" / "B" / "C" / "D" / "E" / "F"                       ; HEXDIG excluding "0"   NZDHEXDIG           = %x31-39 / "A" / "B" / "C" / "E" / "F"                       ; HEXDIG excluding "0" and "D"4.  UTF-8 Delivery Status Notifications   A traditional delivery status notification [RFC3464] comes in a   three-part multipart/report [RFC6522] container, where the first part   is human-readable text describing the error, the second part is a   7-bit-only message/delivery-status, and the optional third part is   used for content (message/rfc822) or header (text/rfc822-headers)   return.  As the present standard DSN format does not permit the   return of undeliverable SMTPUTF8 messages, three new media types have   been defined.  ([RFC5337] introduced experimental versions of these   media types.)4.1.  The message/global-delivery-status Media Type   The first type, message/global-delivery-status, has the syntax of   message/delivery-status with three modifications.  First, the charset   for message/global-delivery-status is UTF-8, and thus any field MAY   contain UTF-8 characters when appropriate (see the ABNF below).  In   particular, the "Diagnostic-Code:" field MAY contain UTF-8 as   described in SMTPUTF8 [RFC6531]; the "Diagnostic-Code:" field SHOULD   be in i-default language [RFC2277].  Second, systems generating a   message/global-delivery-status body part SHOULD use the utf-8-addressHansen, et al.               Standards Track                    [Page 6]

RFC 6533             Internationalized DSN and MDNs        February 2012   form of the UTF-8 address type for all addresses containing   characters outside the ASCII repertoire.  These systems SHOULD up-   convert the utf-8-addr-xtext or the utf-8-addr-unitext form of a   UTF-8 address type in the ORCPT parameter to the utf-8-address form   of a UTF-8 address type in the "Original-Recipient:" field.  Third,   an optional field called "Localized-Diagnostic:" is added.  Each   instance includes a language tag [RFC5646] and contains text in the   specified language.  This is equivalent to the text part of the   "Diagnostic-Code:" field.  All instances of "Localized-Diagnostic:"   MUST use different language tags.  The ABNF for message/   global-delivery-status is specified below.   In the ABNF below, all productions not defined in this document are   defined inAppendix B of [RFC5234], inSection 4 of [RFC3629], or in   [RFC3464].  Note that <text-fixed> is the same as <text> from   [RFC5322], but without <obs-text>.  If or whenRFC 5322 is updated to   disallow <obs-text>, <text-fixed> should become just <text>.  Also,   if or whenRFC 5322 is updated to disallow control characters in   <text>, <text-fixed> should become a reference to that update   instead.   utf-8-delivery-status-content = per-message-fields                         1*( CRLF utf-8-per-recipient-fields )        ; "per-message-fields" remains unchanged from the definition        ; inRFC 3464, except for the "extension-field",        ; which is updated below.   utf-8-per-recipient-fields =         [ original-recipient-field CRLF ]         final-recipient-field CRLF         action-field CRLF         status-field CRLF         [ remote-mta-field CRLF ]         [ diagnostic-code-field CRLF           *(localized-diagnostic-text-field CRLF) ]         [ last-attempt-date-field CRLF ]             [ final-log-id-field CRLF ]         [ will-retry-until-field CRLF ]         *( extension-field CRLF )     ; All fields except for "original-recipient-field",     ; "final-recipient-field", "diagnostic-code-field",     ; and "extension-field" remain unchanged from     ; the definition inRFC 3464.Hansen, et al.               Standards Track                    [Page 7]

RFC 6533             Internationalized DSN and MDNs        February 2012   generic-address =/ utf-8-enc-addr     ; Only allowed with the "utf-8" address-type.     ; UpdatesSection 3.2.3 of RFC 3798.     ;     ; This indirectly updates "original-recipient-field"     ; and "final-recipient-field".   diagnostic-code-field =        "Diagnostic-Code" ":" diagnostic-type ";" *text-fixed   localized-diagnostic-text-field =        "Localized-Diagnostic" ":" Language-Tag ";" *utf8-text     ; "Language-Tag" is a language tag as defined in [RFC5646].   extension-field =/ extension-field-name ":" *utf8-text     ; UpdatesSection 7 of RFC3798   text-fixed = %d1-9 /      ; Any ASCII character except for NUL,                %d11 /       ; CR, and LF.                %d12 /       ; See note above about <text-fixed>                %d14-127   utf8-text = text-fixed / UTF8-non-ascii   UTF8-non-ascii   = UTF8-2 / UTF8-3 / UTF8-44.2.  The message/global Media Type   The second type, used for returning the content, is message/global,   which is similar to message/rfc822, except it contains a message with   UTF-8 headers.  This media type is described in [RFC6532].4.3.  The message/global-headers Media Type   The third type, used for returning the headers, is message/   global-headers and contains only the UTF-8 header fields of a message   (all lines prior to the first blank line in a SMTPUTF8 message).   Unlike message/global, this body part provides no difficulties for   the present infrastructure.4.4.  Using These Media Types with multipart/report   Note that as far as a multipart/report [RFC6522] container is   concerned, message/global-delivery-status, message/global, and   message/global-headers MUST be treated as equivalent to message/   delivery-status, message/rfc822, and text/rfc822-headers.  That is,Hansen, et al.               Standards Track                    [Page 8]

RFC 6533             Internationalized DSN and MDNs        February 2012   implementations processing multipart/report MUST expect any   combinations of the 6 media types mentioned above inside a multipart/   report media type.   All three new types will typically use the "8bit" Content-Transfer-   Encoding.  (In the event all content is 7-bit, the equivalent   traditional types for delivery status notifications MAY be used.  For   example, if information in a message/global-delivery-status part can   be represented without any loss of information as message/   delivery-status, then the message/delivery-status body part may be   used.)  Note that [RFC6532] relaxed a restriction from MIME [RFC2046]   regarding the use of Content-Transfer-Encoding in new "message"   subtypes.  This specification explicitly allows the use of Content-   Transfer-Encoding in message/global-headers and message/   global-delivery-status.  This is not believed to be problematic as   these new media types are intended primarily for use by newer systems   with full support for 8-bit MIME and UTF-8 headers.4.5.  Additional Requirements on SMTP Servers   If an SMTP server that advertises both SMTPUTF8 and DSN needs to   return an undeliverable SMTPUTF8 message, then it has two choices for   encapsulating the SMTPUTF8 message when generating the corresponding   multipart/report:      If the return-path SMTP server does not support SMTPUTF8, then the      undeliverable body part and headers MUST be encoded using a 7-bit      Content-Transfer-Encoding such as "base64" or "quoted-printable"      [RFC2045], as detailed inSection 4.      Otherwise, "8bit" Content-Transfer-Encoding can be used.5.  UTF-8 Message Disposition Notifications   Message Disposition Notifications [RFC3798] have a similar design and   structure to DSNs.  As a result, they use the same basic return   format.  When generating an MDN for a UTF-8 header message, the third   part of the multipart/report contains the returned content (message/   global) or header (message/global-headers), same as for DSNs.  The   second part of the multipart/report uses a new media type, message/   global-disposition-notification, which has the syntax of message/   disposition-notification with two modifications.  First, the charset   for message/global-disposition-notification is UTF-8, and thus any   field MAY contain UTF-8 characters when appropriate (see the ABNF   below).  (In particular, the failure-field, the error-field, and the   warning-field MAY contain UTF-8.  These fields SHOULD be in i-defaultHansen, et al.               Standards Track                    [Page 9]

RFC 6533             Internationalized DSN and MDNs        February 2012   language [RFC2277].)  Second, systems generating a message/   global-disposition-notification body part (typically a mail user   agent) SHOULD use the UTF-8 address type for all addresses containing   characters outside the ASCII repertoire.   The MDN specification also defines the "Original-Recipient:" header   field, which is added with a copy of the contents of ORCPT at   delivery time.  When generating an "Original-Recipient:" header   field, a delivery agent writing a UTF-8 header message in native   format SHOULD convert the utf-8-addr-xtext or the utf-8-addr-unitext   form of a UTF-8 address type in the ORCPT parameter to the   corresponding utf-8-address form.   The MDN specification also defines the "Disposition-Notification-To:"   header field, which is an address header field and thus follows the   same 8-bit rules as other address header fields such as "From:" and   "To:" when used in a UTF-8 header message.     ; ABNF for "original-recipient-header", "original-recipient-field",     ; and "final-recipient-field" fromRFC 3798 is implicitly updated     ; as they use the updated "generic-address" as defined in     ;Section 4 of this document.   failure-field = "Failure" ":" *utf8-text     ; "utf8-text" is defined inSection 4 of this document.   error-field = "Error" ":" *utf8-text     ; "utf8-text" is defined inSection 4 of this document.   warning-field = "Warning" ":" *utf8-text     ; "utf8-text" is defined inSection 4 of this document.6.  IANA Considerations   This specification does not create any new IANA registries.  However,   the following items have been registered as a result of this   document.6.1.  UTF-8 Mail Address Type Registration   The mail address type registry was created by [RFC3464].  The   registration template response follows:   (a) The address-type name.       UTF-8Hansen, et al.               Standards Track                   [Page 10]

RFC 6533             Internationalized DSN and MDNs        February 2012   (b) The syntax for mailbox addresses of this type, specified using       BNF, regular expressions, ASN.1, or other non-ambiguous language.       SeeSection 3.   (c) If addresses of this type are not composed entirely of graphic       characters from the ASCII repertoire, a specification for how       they are to be encoded as graphic ASCII characters in an       "Original-Recipient:" or "Final-Recipient:" DSN field.       This address type has 3 forms (as defined inSection 3):       utf-8-addr-xtext, utf-8-addr-unitext, and utf-8-address.  Only       the first form is 7-bit safe.6.2.  Update to 'smtp' Diagnostic Type Registration   The mail diagnostic type registry was created by [RFC3464] and   updated by [RFC5337].  This specification replaces [RFC5337].  The   registration for the 'smtp' diagnostic type has been updated to   referenceRFC 6533 in addition to [RFC3464] and to remove the   reference to [RFC5337].   When the 'smtp' diagnostic type is used in the context of a message/   delivery-status body part, it remains as presently defined.  When the   'smtp' diagnostic type is used in the context of a message/   global-delivery-status body part, the codes remain the same, but the   text portion MAY contain UTF-8 characters.6.3.  message/global-headers   Type name:  message   Subtype name:  global-headers   Required parameters:  none   Optional parameters:  none   Encoding considerations:  This media type contains Internationalized      Email Headers [RFC6532] with no message body.  Whenever possible,      the 8-bit content transfer encoding SHOULD be used.  When this      media type passes through a 7-bit-only SMTP infrastructure, it MAY      be encoded with the base64 or quoted-printable content transfer      encoding.   Security considerations:  SeeSection 7.Hansen, et al.               Standards Track                   [Page 11]

RFC 6533             Internationalized DSN and MDNs        February 2012   Interoperability considerations:  It is important that this media      type is not converted to a charset other than UTF-8.  As a result,      implementations MUST NOT include a charset parameter with this      media type.  Although it might be possible to down-convert this      media type to the text/rfc822-header media type, such conversion      is discouraged as it loses information.   Published specification:RFC 6533   Applications that use this media type:  SMTPUTF8 servers and email      clients that support multipart/report generation or parsing.   Additional information:      Magic number(s):  none      File extension(s):  In the event this is saved to a file, the         extension ".u8hdr" is suggested.      Macintosh file type code(s):  The 'TEXT' type code is suggested as         files of this type are typically used for diagnostic purposes         and suitable for analysis in a UTF-8-aware text editor.  A         uniform type identifier (UTI) of         "public.utf8-email-message-header" is suggested.  This type         conforms to "public.utf8-plain-text" and "public.plain-text".   Person & email address to contact for further information:  See the      Authors' Addresses section of this document.   Intended usage:  COMMON   Restrictions on usage:  This media type contains textual data in the      UTF-8 charset.  It typically contains octets with the 8th bit set.      As a result, a transfer encoding is required when a 7-bit      transport is used.   Author:  See the Authors' Addresses section of this document.   Change controller:  IETF Standards Process6.4.  message/global-delivery-status   Type name:  message   Subtype name:  global-delivery-status   Required parameters:  noneHansen, et al.               Standards Track                   [Page 12]

RFC 6533             Internationalized DSN and MDNs        February 2012   Optional parameters:  none   Encoding considerations:  This media type contains delivery status      notification attributes in the UTF-8 charset.  The 8-bit content      transfer encoding MUST be used with this content-type, unless it      is sent over a 7-bit transport environment, in which case quoted-      printable or base64 may be necessary.   Security considerations:  SeeSection 7   Interoperability considerations:  This media type provides      functionality similar to the message/delivery-status content-type      for email message return information.  Clients of the previous      format will need to be upgraded to interpret the new format;      however, the new media type makes it simple to identify the      difference.   Published specification:RFC 6533   Applications that use this media type:  SMTP servers and email      clients that support delivery status notification generation or      parsing.   Additional information:      Magic number(s):  none      File extension(s):  The extension ".u8dsn" is suggested.      Macintosh file type code(s):  A uniform type identifier (UTI) of         "public.utf8-email-message-delivery-status" is suggested.  This         type conforms to "public.utf8-plain-text".   Person & email address to contact for further information:  See the      Authors' Addresses section of this document.   Intended usage:  COMMON   Restrictions on usage:  This is expected to be the second part of a      multipart/report.   Author:  See the Authors' Addresses section of this document.   Change controller:  IETF Standards ProcessHansen, et al.               Standards Track                   [Page 13]

RFC 6533             Internationalized DSN and MDNs        February 20126.5.  message/global-disposition-notification   Type name:  message   Subtype name:  global-disposition-notification   Required parameters:  none   Optional parameters:  none   Encoding considerations:  This media type contains disposition      notification attributes in the UTF-8 charset.  The 8-bit content      transfer encoding MUST be used with this content-type, unless it      is sent over a 7-bit transport environment, in which case quoted-      printable or base64 may be necessary.   Security considerations:  SeeSection 7.   Interoperability considerations:  This media type provides      functionality similar to the message/disposition-notification      content-type for email message disposition information.  Clients      of the previous format will need to be upgraded to interpret the      new format; however, the new media type makes it simple to      identify the difference.   Published specification:RFC 6533   Applications that use this media type:  Email clients or servers that      support message disposition notification generation or parsing.   Additional information:      Magic number(s):  none      File extension(s):  The extension ".u8mdn" is suggested.      Macintosh file type code(s):  A uniform type identifier (UTI) of         "public.utf8-email-message-disposition-notification" is         suggested.  This type conforms to "public.utf8-plain-text".   Person & email address to contact for further information:  See the      Authors' Addresses section of this document.   Intended usage:  COMMON   Restrictions on usage:  This is expected to be the second part of a      multipart/report.Hansen, et al.               Standards Track                   [Page 14]

RFC 6533             Internationalized DSN and MDNs        February 2012   Author:  See the Authors' Addresses section of this document.   Change controller:  IETF Standards Process7.  Security Considerations   Automated use of report types without authentication presents several   security issues.  Forging negative reports presents the opportunity   for denial-of-service attacks when the reports are used for automated   maintenance of directories or mailing lists.  Forging positive   reports may cause the sender to incorrectly believe a message was   delivered when it was not.   Malicious users can generate report structures designed to trigger   coding flaws in report parsers.  Report parsers need to use secure   coding techniques to avoid the risk of buffer overflow or denial-of-   service attacks against parser coding mistakes.  Code reviews of such   parsers are also recommended.   Malicious users of the email system regularly send messages with   forged envelope return paths, and these messages trigger delivery   status reports that result in a large amount of unwanted traffic on   the Internet.  Many users choose to ignore delivery status   notifications because they are usually the result of "blowback" from   forged messages and thus never notice when messages they sent go   undelivered.  As a result, support for correlation of delivery status   and message disposition notification messages with sent messages has   become a critical feature of mail clients and possibly mail stores,   if the email infrastructure is to remain reliable.  In the short   term, simply correlating Message-IDs may be sufficient to distinguish   true status notifications from those resulting from forged originator   addresses.  But in the longer term, including cryptographic signature   material that can securely associate the status notification with the   original message is advisable.   As this specification permits UTF-8 in additional fields, the   security considerations of UTF-8 [RFC3629] apply.Hansen, et al.               Standards Track                   [Page 15]

RFC 6533             Internationalized DSN and MDNs        February 20128.  References8.1.  Normative References   [ASCII]    American National Standards Institute (formerly United              States of America Standards Institute), "USA Code for              Information Interchange", ANSI X3.4-1968, 1968.              ANSI X3.4-1968 has been replaced by newer versions with              slight modifications, but the 1968 version remains              definitive for the Internet.   [RFC2119]  Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate              Requirement Levels",BCP 14,RFC 2119, March 1997.   [RFC2277]  Alvestrand, H., "IETF Policy on Character Sets and              Languages",BCP 18,RFC 2277, January 1998.   [RFC3461]  Moore, K., "Simple Mail Transfer Protocol (SMTP) Service              Extension for Delivery Status Notifications (DSNs)",RFC 3461, January 2003.   [RFC3464]  Moore, K. and G. Vaudreuil, "An Extensible Message Format              for Delivery Status Notifications",RFC 3464,              January 2003.   [RFC3629]  Yergeau, F., "UTF-8, a transformation format of ISO              10646", STD 63,RFC 3629, November 2003.   [RFC3798]  Hansen, T. and G. Vaudreuil, "Message Disposition              Notification",RFC 3798, May 2004.   [RFC5234]  Crocker, D. and P. Overell, "Augmented BNF for Syntax              Specifications: ABNF", STD 68,RFC 5234, January 2008.   [RFC5321]  Klensin, J., "Simple Mail Transfer Protocol",RFC 5321,              October 2008.   [RFC5322]  Resnick, P., Ed., "Internet Message Format",RFC 5322,              October 2008.   [RFC5646]  Phillips, A. and M. Davis, "Tags for Identifying              Languages",BCP 47,RFC 5646, September 2009.   [RFC6522]  Kucherawy, M., Ed., "The Multipart/Report Media Type for              the Reporting of Mail System Administrative Messages", STD              73,RFC 6522, January 2012.Hansen, et al.               Standards Track                   [Page 16]

RFC 6533             Internationalized DSN and MDNs        February 2012   [RFC6530]  Klensin, J. and Y. Ko, "Overview and Framework for              Internationalized Email",RFC 6530, February 2012.   [RFC6531]  Yao, J. and W. Mao, "SMTP Extension for Internationalized              Email",RFC 6531, February 2012.   [RFC6532]  Yang, A., Steele, S., and N. Freed, "Internationalized              Email Headers",RFC 6532, February 2012.8.2.  Informative References   [RFC2045]  Freed, N. and N. Borenstein, "Multipurpose Internet Mail              Extensions (MIME) Part One: Format of Internet Message              Bodies",RFC 2045, November 1996.   [RFC2046]  Freed, N. and N. Borenstein, "Multipurpose Internet Mail              Extensions (MIME) Part Two: Media Types",RFC 2046,              November 1996.   [RFC5337]  Newman, C. and A. Melnikov, "Internationalized Delivery              Status and Disposition Notifications",RFC 5337,              September 2008.Hansen, et al.               Standards Track                   [Page 17]

RFC 6533             Internationalized DSN and MDNs        February 2012Appendix A.  Changes sinceRFC 5337   Changes were made to move from Experimental to Standards Track.  The   most significant was the removal of an embedded alternative ASCII   address within a utf-8-address, and the reflections of the ABNF   changes in [RFC6531].   Fixed description of utf-8-addr-xtext and utf-8-addr-unitext.   References to Downgrade and uMailbox removed/fixed.   ABNF changes and fixed errata submitted by Alfred Hoenes.   Minor changes to MIME type references.   Other minor corrections.Appendix B.  Acknowledgements   Many thanks for input provided by Pete Resnick, James Galvin, Ned   Freed, John Klensin, Harald Alvestrand, Frank Ellermann, SM, Alfred   Hoenes, Kazunori Fujiwara, and members of the EAI working group to   help solidify this proposal.Hansen, et al.               Standards Track                   [Page 18]

RFC 6533             Internationalized DSN and MDNs        February 2012Authors' Addresses   Tony Hansen (editor)   AT&T Laboratories   200 Laurel Ave.   Middletown, NJ  07748   US   EMail: tony+eaidsn@maillennium.att.com   Chris Newman   Oracle   800 Royal Oaks   Monrovia, CA  91016-6347   US   EMail: chris.newman@oracle.com   Alexey Melnikov   Isode Ltd   5 Castle Business Village   36 Station Road   Hampton, Middlesex  TW12 2BX   UK   EMail: Alexey.Melnikov@isode.comHansen, et al.               Standards Track                   [Page 19]

[8]ページ先頭

©2009-2026 Movatter.jp