Internationalized Email and Extensions BOF (iee)

xxxxxxxx, November x at xxxx-xxxx
=================================

CHAIR: John Klensin <john-ietf@jck.com> 

DESCRIPTION: 

We propose a BOF/ proto-WG session for the Vancouver IETF to discuss 
internationalization of email addresses, including a supporting SMTP 
Extension and the required internationalization of email headers, 
expressing the latter in UTF-8. A design team based in the Joint 
Engineering Team, consisting of specialists from CNNIC, JPNIC/JPRS, 
KRNIC, and TWNIC plus some invited specialists have prepared and 
posted key base documents for this work.

Internationalization of email addresses is the key next step in
moving the Internet from its base in ASCII-only identifiers.
People's desire to use their names, correctly spelled, in email
address local-parts is far stronger than the desire to use
internationalized domain names, already standardized by the IETF.

The goal of this work is to pursue, via a WG and IETF processes,
one possible approach to email internationalization, carrying it
through to a series of Experimental specifications. Once those
specifications exist, implementations will be created and tested.
If the results of that work are satisfactory, a reconstituted WG
will be proposed to standardize the approach.

The longer session is proposed in order to start community review
on the documents and strategy themselves, rather than just
establishing interest (which is already clear from the JET effort
and an earlier effort/mailing list that operated under the "IMAA"
label) and reviewing the proposed charter.


AGENDA:

Introduction, agenda bashing. Circa 10 minutes.
Review of the general approach. Participants will be expected to
have read at least the documents listed below. Circa 20 minutes.
Review and discussion of the proposed charter. 20 minutes
Specific document review and discussion. 70-100 minutes


Specific Documents
These documents may be updated prior to the cutoff. This agenda
will be updated to correspond.
Draft charter (attached to this proposal)
draft-klensin-ima-framework-00.txt
draft-yao-ima-smtpext-00.txt
draft-yeh-ima-utf8headers-00.txt
Additional documents are expected to be posted before IETF, as
discussed in the "framework" document cited above.


2. Draft IMA Charter

2.1. Chair(s)

To be determined

2.2. Applications Area Director(s)

Ted Hardie <hardie@qualcomm.com>
Scott Hollenbeck <shollenbeck@verisign.com>

2.3. Applications Area Advisor

To be determined

2.4. Mailing Lists

General Discussion: ima@ietf.org
To Subscribe: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ima
Archive: http://www1.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ima/index.html

2.5. Description of Working Group

Since early in the effort to internationalize domain names, which
cumulated in the standards associated with IDNA, it has been
understood that internationalization of email address local parts is
even more important. After all, most prefer variations on their
names for those addresses. At the same time, email address
internationalization poses a series of special problems. Constraints
on the interpretation of local-parts except on the final delivery
system --constraints that go back to before RFC 821 and that have
been vital to the operation of the Internet's email environment--
make address encoding nearly impossible. The need to use addresses
in both the email envelope and in header fields, and to do so in ways
that are at least compatible suggests that this is not a simple and
isolated problem.

This working group will address one basic approach to email
internationalization. That approach is based on the use of an SMTP
extension to enable both the use of UTF-8 in envelope address local-
parts and the use of UTF-8 in mail headers -- both in address
contexts and wherever encoded-words are permitted today. Its initial
target will be a set of experimental RFCs that specify the details of
this approach and provide the basis for generating and testing
interoperable implementations. Its work will include examining
whether "downgrading" -- transforming an internationalized message to
one that is compatible with unextended SMTP clients and servers and
unextended MUAs -- is feasible and appropriate and, if it is,
specifying a way to do so.

Once the Experimental RFCs are completed and implemented, they will
be evaluated. If the approach is found to have been successful using
criteria the WG will establish as an early work item, the WG will be
reactivated to update the documents for processing onto the standards
track.

2.6. Goals and Milestones

Very tentative

+-------------+--------------------------------------+--------------+
| 27 Sept: | First draft charter circulated to | Done |
| | ADs and key onlookers | |
| 30 Sept | First draft SMTP extension | Done |
| | specification | |
| Oct 3: | Consolidated overview and framework | Done |
| | draft submitted for I-D posting | |
| Oct 3: | Draft WG charter, formal time-slot | John |
| | request for IETF 64, and fallback | |
| | BOF request submitted to | |
| | Applications Area Directors | |
| Oct 3: | Circulate draft charter to IMA | John |
| | mailing list for comment. | |
| Oct 17: | First draft of downgrade | JPRS |
| | specification | |
| Oct 17: | First draft of key open questions | JPRS |
| | list | |
| Oct 17: | First draft of "UTF-8 headers" | Jeff |
| Oct 24: | Second draft of overview and | Yangwoo/John |
| | framework document if needed. | |
| Oct 24: | New draft of SMTP extension | Jiankang |
| | specification. | |
| Nov 2 | Consolidated/updated list of | JPRS |
| | questions for IETF meeting review to | |
| | mailing list | |
| Week of Nov | Meet at IETF 64, review and identify | |
| 6: | outstanding issues with drafts. | |
| Nov 28: | Third draft of framework document | |
| | (last one?) | |
| Nov 28: | Second draft of base technical | |
| | specification. | |
+-------------+--------------------------------------+--------------+

Table 1

[[Note in draft: additional documents? For example, do we need an
informational "considerations for MUA authors" one?]]

+--------------+----------------------------------------------------+
| ??? | Framework document complete, submit to IESG for |
| | publication as Experimental or Informational RFC |
| | [[note in draft: I have no idea whether the IESG |
| | will approve this document without enough of the |
| | package to be implementable, but, for now...]] |
| ??? | Base technical and UTF-8 header documents |
| | complete, submit for approval and publication as |
| | Experimental RFCs |
| ??? | Additional documents complete and submitted for |
| | approval and publication as experimental RFCs. |
| ??? - ??? | Period of implementation and evaluation |
| ??? | Implementation and operational experience |
| | evaluation draft posted |
| ??? | Revised versions of all required documents posted |
| ??? | Second version of all required documents |
| ??? | Request to IESG to Last Call required documents |
| | for Proposed Standard and to public the experience |
| | and evaluation draft as an Informational RFC. |
+--------------+----------------------------------------------------+

2.7. Internet-Drafts

Drafts listed below were posted as initial discussion documents,
preceeding the meeting at IETF 64

2005.06.27 draft-lee-jet-ima-00.txt
2005.07.18 draft-klensin-emailaddr-i18n-03.txt

Drafts produced by the WG

None as yet

2.8. Request For Comments

None as yet