errata logo graphic

Found 6 records.

Status: Verified (5)

RFC3696, "Application Techniques for Checking and Transformation of Names", February 2004

Source of RFC: INDEPENDENT

Errata ID: 246

Status: Verified
Type: Technical

Reported By: John C. Klensin
Date Reported: 2005-07-09

Section 3 says:

   The exact rule is that any ASCII character, including control
   characters, may appear quoted, or in a quoted string.  When quoting
   is needed, the backslash character is used to quote the following
   character.  For example

      Abc\@def@example.com

   is a valid form of an email address.  Blank spaces may also appear,
   as in

      Fred\ Bloggs@example.com

   The backslash character may also be used to quote itself, e.g.,

      Joe.\\Blow@example.com

It should say:

   The exact rule is that any ASCII character, including control
   characters, may appear quoted, or in a quoted string.  When quoting
   is needed, the backslash character is used to quote the following
   character.  For example

      "Abc\@def"@example.com

   is a valid form of an email address.  Blank spaces may also appear,
   as in

      "Fred\ Bloggs"@example.com

   The backslash character may also be used to quote itself, e.g.,

      "Joe.\\Blow"@example.com

Errata ID: 1003

Status: Verified
Type: Technical

Reported By: John C. Klensin
Date Reported: 2005-07-09

Section 3 says:

   In addition to restrictions on syntax, there is a length limit on
   email addresses.  That limit is a maximum of 64 characters (octets)
   in the "local part" (before the "@") and a maximum of 255 characters
   (octets) in the domain part (after the "@") for a total length of 320
   characters.  Systems that handle email should be prepared to process
   addresses which are that long, even though they are rarely
   encountered.

It should say:

   In addition to restrictions on syntax, there is a length limit on
   email addresses.  That limit is a maximum of 64 characters (octets)
   in the "local part" (before the "@") and a maximum of 255 characters
   (octets) in the domain part (after the "@") for a total length of 320
   characters. However, there is a restriction in RFC 2821 on the length of an
   address in MAIL and RCPT commands of 256 characters.  Since addresses
   that do not fit in those fields are not normally useful, the upper
   limit on address lengths should normally be considered to be 256.

   


Errata ID: 1004

Status: Verified
Type: Technical

Reported By: Charles Curran
Date Reported: 2007-09-09
Verifier Name: John C. Klensin
Date Verified: 2007-09-09

Section 4.3 says:

   +-------------------------+-----------------------------+-----------+
   |      Email address      |         MAILTO URL          |   Notes   |
   +-------------------------+-----------------------------+-----------+
   |     Joe@example.com     |  mailto:joe@example.com     |     1     |

...

   Notes on Table

   1.  No characters appear in the email address that require escaping,
       so the body of the MAILTO URL is identical to the email address.

It should say:

   +-------------------------+-----------------------------+-----------+
   |      Email address      |         MAILTO URL          |   Notes   |
   +-------------------------+-----------------------------+-----------+
   |     Joe@example.com     |  mailto:Joe@example.com     |     1     |

...

   Notes on Table

   1.  No characters appear in the email address that
       require escaping, so the body of the MAILTO URL is
       identical to the email address.  Because the local part
       of email addresses may be treated as case-sensitive by
       the system hosting the mailbox (see RFC 2821, Section
       4.1.2), "mailto:joe@example.com" would not be a valid
       URL for the mailbox Joe@example.com even though, if the
       recommendations of RFC 2821 are followed, it would work
       as a synonym.  See also Section 6.2.3 of RFC 3986.

Errata ID: 1690

Status: Verified
Type: Technical

Reported By: Dominic Sayers
Date Reported: 2009-02-22
Verifier Name: Nevil Brownlee
Date Verified: 2010-04-03

Section 3 says:

(from erratum 1003)

In addition to restrictions on syntax, there is a length limit on
   email addresses.  That limit is a maximum of 64 characters (octets)
   in the "local part" (before the "@") and a maximum of 255 characters
   (octets) in the domain part (after the "@") for a total length of 320
   characters. However, there is a restriction in RFC 2821 on the length of an
   address in MAIL and RCPT commands of 256 characters.  Since addresses
   that do not fit in those fields are not normally useful, the upper
   limit on address lengths should normally be considered to be 256.

It should say:

In addition to restrictions on syntax, there is a length limit on
   email addresses.  That limit is a maximum of 64 characters (octets)
   in the "local part" (before the "@") and a maximum of 255 characters
   (octets) in the domain part (after the "@") for a total length of 320
   characters. However, there is a restriction in RFC 2821 on the length of an
   address in MAIL and RCPT commands of 254 characters.  Since addresses
   that do not fit in those fields are not normally useful, the upper
   limit on address lengths should normally be considered to be 254.

Notes:

I believe erratum ID 1003 is slightly wrong. RFC 2821 places a 256 character limit on the forward-path. But a path is defined as

Path = "<" [ A-d-l ":" ] Mailbox ">"

So the forward-path will contain at least a pair of angle brackets in addition to the Mailbox. This limits the Mailbox (i.e. the email address) to 254 characters.


Errata ID: 3563

Status: Verified
Type: Technical

Reported By: David Hoerl
Date Reported: 2013-03-22
Verifier Name: Nevil Brownlee
Date Verified: 2014-02-03

Section 3.4 says:

Section 3 says:

   The exact rule is that any ASCII character, including control
   characters, may appear quoted, or in a quoted string.  When quoting
   is needed, the backslash character is used to quote the following
   character.  For example

      Abc\@def@example.com

   is a valid form of an email address.  Blank spaces may also appear,
   as in

      Fred\ Bloggs@example.com

   The backslash character may also be used to quote itself, e.g.,

      Joe.\\Blow@example.com


It should say:

Section 3 says:

   The exact rule is that any ASCII character, including control
   characters, may appear quoted, or in a quoted string.  When quoting
   is needed, the backslash character is used to quote the following
   character.  For example

      Abc\@def@example.com
or      
      "Abc@def"@example.com

   is a valid form of an email address.  Blank spaces may also appear,
   as in

      Fred\ Bloggs@example.com
or      
      "Fred Bloggs"@example.com

   The backslash character may also be used to quote itself, e.g.,

      Joe.\\Blow@example.com
or      
      " Joe.\Blow"@example.com


Notes:

Errata 246 is clearly wrong. The author changed the quoting to make it appear backslash quoting was required to use a single backquote. This is totally wrong, and contradicts the RFC text:

"may appear quoted, or in a quoted string".

I tested today with several mailers sending to the google pseudo-alias of first.last+note@gmail.com, where note can be arbitrary text. By testing numerous versions of quoting I was able to see that my corrected text was what appeared in the destination email.


Status: Reported (1)

RFC3696, "Application Techniques for Checking and Transformation of Names", February 2004

Source of RFC: INDEPENDENT

Errata ID: 4002

Status: Reported
Type: Technical

Reported By: Brandon Gabbert
Date Reported: 2014-05-28

Section 3 says:

   The exact rule is that any ASCII character, including control
   characters, may appear quoted, or in a quoted string.  When quoting
   is needed, the backslash character is used to quote the following
   character.  For example

      Abc\@def@example.com

   is a valid form of an email address.  Blank spaces may also appear,
   as in

      Fred\ Bloggs@example.com

   The backslash character may also be used to quote itself, e.g.,

      Joe.\\Blow@example.com

   In addition to quoting using the backslash character, conventional
   double-quote characters may be used to surround strings.  For example

      "Abc@def"@example.com

      "Fred Bloggs"@example.com

   are alternate forms of the first two examples above.

It should say:

   The exact rule is that any ASCII character, including control
   characters, may appear quoted, or in a quoted string.  When quoting
   is needed, the backslash character is used to quote the following
   character.  For example

      Abc\@def@example.com

   is a valid form of an email address.  Blank spaces may also appear,
   as in

      Fred\ Bloggs@example.com

   The backslash character may also be used to quote itself, e.g.,

      Joe.\\Blow@example.com

   In addition to quoting using the backslash character, conventional
   double-quote characters may be used to surround strings.  For example

      "Abc@def"@example.com

      "Fred Bloggs"@example.com

      "Joe.\\Blow"@example.com

   are alternate forms of the examples above.

Notes:

Errata 3563 is incorrect. The first two suggested additions it makes to the spec are actually already present in the original spec just one paragraph down. The third and final suggested addition (allowing an unquoted backslash in a quoted string), while appearing to comport with this RFC, violates RFC 2822 (the reference document for this section). While the suggested email address is valid, it is not equivalent to the original.

RFC 2822 sections 3.2.1, 3.2.2, and 3.2.5 define quoted-string as consisting of any unquoted ASCII character except for backslash and double quote, and any backslash-quoted ASCII character including backslash and double quote.

Thus, while it is correct that

"Joe.\Blow"@example.com

is a valid email address, it is not equivalent to

Joe.\\Blow@example.com

as the \B in the first should be interpreted as a quoted B, not as an illegally unquoted backslash followed by a B. The quoted equivalent of

Joe.\\Blow@example.com

is

"Joe.\\Blow"@example.com

This example was probably left out of the original spec because the quoted-string version differs from the original only in the quotes themselves.


Report New Errata