draft-ietf-lamps-eai-addresses-00.txt		draft-ietf-lamps-eai-addresses-01.txt
	lamps A. Melnikov, Ed.		LAMPS A. Melnikov, Ed.
	Internet-Draft Isode Ltd		Internet-Draft Isode Ltd
	Intended status: Standards Track W. Chuang, Ed.		Intended status: Standards Track W. Chuang, Ed.
	Expires: January 25, 2017 Google, Inc.		Expires: May 3, 2017 Google, Inc.
	July 24, 2016		October 30, 2016
	Internationalized Email Addresses in X.509 certificates		Internationalized Email Addresses in X.509 certificates
	draft-ietf-lamps-eai-addresses-00		draft-ietf-lamps-eai-addresses-01
	Abstract		Abstract
	This document defines a new name form for inclusion in the otherName		This document defines a new name form for inclusion in the otherName
	field of an X.509 Subject Alternative Name extension that allows a		field of an X.509 Subject Alternative Name extension that allows a
	certificate subject to be associated with an Internationalized Email		certificate subject to be associated with an Internationalized Email
	Address.		Address.
	Status of This Memo		Status of This Memo
	skipping to change at page 1, line 34 ¶		skipping to change at page 1, line 34 ¶
	Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering		Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
	Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute		Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute
	working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-		working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-
	Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.		Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.
	Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months		Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
	and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any		and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
	time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference		time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
	material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."		material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
	This Internet-Draft will expire on January 25, 2017.		This Internet-Draft will expire on May 3, 2017.
	Copyright Notice		Copyright Notice
	Copyright (c) 2016 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the		Copyright (c) 2016 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
	document authors. All rights reserved.		document authors. All rights reserved.
	This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal		This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
	Provisions Relating to IETF Documents		Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
	(http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of		(http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
	publication of this document. Please review these documents		publication of this document. Please review these documents
	skipping to change at page 2, line 13 ¶		skipping to change at page 2, line 13 ¶
	described in the Simplified BSD License.		described in the Simplified BSD License.
	Table of Contents		Table of Contents
	1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2		1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
	2. Conventions Used in This Document . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2		2. Conventions Used in This Document . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
	3. Name Definitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2		3. Name Definitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
	4. Matching of Internationalized Email Addresses in X.509		4. Matching of Internationalized Email Addresses in X.509
	certificates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3		certificates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
	5. Name constraints in path validation . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4		5. Name constraints in path validation . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
	6. Resource Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5		6. Resource Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
	7. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5		7. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
	8. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6		8. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
	9. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6		9. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
	9.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6		9.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
	9.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7		9.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
	Appendix A. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7		Appendix A. ASN.1 Module . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
	Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7		Appendix B. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
			Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
	1. Introduction		1. Introduction
	[RFC5280] defines rfc822Name subjectAltName choice for representing		[RFC5280] defines rfc822Name subjectAltName choice for representing
	[RFC5322] email addresses. This form is restricted to a subset of		[RFC5322] email addresses. This form is restricted to a subset of
	US-ASCII characters and thus can't be used to represent		US-ASCII characters and thus can't be used to represent
	Internationalized Email addresses [RFC6531].		Internationalized Email addresses [RFC6531]. To fascilitate use of
			these Internationalized Email addresses with X.509 certificates, this
			document specifies a new name form in otherName so that
			subjectAltName and issuerAltName can carry them.
	2. Conventions Used in This Document		2. Conventions Used in This Document
	The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",		The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
	"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this		"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
	document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119].		document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119].
	The formal syntax use the Augmented Backus-Naur Form (ABNF) [RFC5234]		The formal syntax use the Augmented Backus-Naur Form (ABNF) [RFC5234]
	notation.		notation.
	3. Name Definitions		3. Name Definitions
	This section defines the smtputf8Name name as a form of otherName		The GeneralName structure is defined in [RFC5280], and supports many
	from the GeneralName structure in SubjectAltName defined in		different names forms including otherName for extensibility. This
	[RFC5280].		section specifies the smtputf8Name name form of otherName, so that
			Internationalized Email addresses can appear in the subjectAltName of
	id-on-smtputf8Name OBJECT IDENTIFIER ::= { id-on XXX }		a certificate, the issuerAltName of a certificate, or anywhere else
			that GeneralName is used.
	smtputf8Name ::= UTF8String (SIZE (1..MAX))
	When the subjectAltName extension contains an Internationalized Email		id-on-smtputf8Name OBJECT IDENTIFIER ::= { id-on 9 }
	address, the address MUST be stored in the smtputf8Name name form of		Smtputf8Name ::= UTF8String (SIZE (1..MAX))
	otherName. The format of smtputf8Name is defined as the ABNF rule
	smtputf8Mailbox. smtputf8Mailbox is a modified version of the
	Internationalized Mailbox which is defined in Section 3.3 of
	[RFC6531] which is itself derived from SMTP Mailbox from		When the subjectAltName (or issuerAltName) extension contains an
	Section 4.1.2 of [RFC5321]. [RFC6531] defines the following ABNF		Internationalized Email address, the address MUST be stored in the
	rules for Mailbox whose parts are modified for internationalization:		smtputf8Name name form of otherName. The format of smtputf8Name is
	<Local-part>, <Dot-string>, <Quoted-string>, <QcontentSMTP>,		defined as the ABNF rule smtputf8Mailbox. smtputf8Mailbox is a
	<Domain>, and <Atom>. In particular <Local-part> was updated to also		modified version of the Internationalized Mailbox which is defined in
	support UTF8-non-ascii. UTF8-non-ascii is described by Section 3.1		Section 3.3 of [RFC6531] which is itself derived from SMTP Mailbox
	of [RFC6532]. Also sub-domain is extended to support U-label, as		from Section 4.1.2 of [RFC5321]. [RFC6531] defines the following
	defined in [RFC5890]		ABNF rules for Mailbox whose parts are modified for
			internationalization: <Local-part>, <Dot-string>, <Quoted-string>,
			<QcontentSMTP>, <Domain>, and <Atom>. In particular <Local-part> was
			updated to also support UTF8-non-ascii. UTF8-non-ascii is described
			by Section 3.1 of [RFC6532]. Also sub-domain is extended to support
			U-label, as defined in [RFC5890]
	This document further refines Internationalized [RFC6531] Mailbox		This document further refines Internationalized [RFC6531] Mailbox
	ABNF rules and calls this smtputf8Mailbox. In smtputf8Mailbox, sub-		ABNF rules and calls this smtputf8Mailbox. In smtputf8Mailbox, sub-
	domain that encode non-ascii characters SHALL use U-label Unicode		domain that encode non-ascii characters SHALL use U-label Unicode
	native character labels and MUST NOT use A-label [RFC5890]. This		native character labels and MUST NOT use A-label [RFC5890]. This
	restriction prevents having to determine which label encoding A- or		restriction prevents having to determine which label encoding A- or
	U-label is present in the Domain. As per Section 2.3.2.1 of		U-label is present in the Domain. As per Section 2.3.2.1 of
	[RFC5890], U-label use UTF-8 [RFC3629] with Normalization Form C and		[RFC5890], U-label use UTF-8 [RFC3629] with Normalization Form C and
	other properties specified there. In smtputf8Mailbox, sub-domain		other properties specified there. In smtputf8Mailbox, sub-domain
	that encode solely ASCII character labels SHALL use NR-LDH		that encode solely ASCII character labels SHALL use NR-LDH
	skipping to change at page 3, line 35 ¶		skipping to change at page 3, line 41 ¶
	no comment (text surrounded in parentheses) after it, and is not		no comment (text surrounded in parentheses) after it, and is not
	surrounded by "<" and ">".		surrounded by "<" and ">".
	In the context of building name constraint as needed by [RFC5280],		In the context of building name constraint as needed by [RFC5280],
	the smtputf8Mailbox rules are modified to allow partial productions		the smtputf8Mailbox rules are modified to allow partial productions
	to allow for additional forms required by Section 5. Name		to allow for additional forms required by Section 5. Name
	constraints may specify a complete email address, host name, or		constraints may specify a complete email address, host name, or
	domain. This means that the local-part may be missing, and domain		domain. This means that the local-part may be missing, and domain
	partially specified.		partially specified.
			smtputf8Name is encoded as UTF8String. The UTF8String encoding MUST
			NOT contain a Byte-Order-Mark (BOM) [RFC3629] to aid consistency
			across implementations particularly for comparison.
	4. Matching of Internationalized Email Addresses in X.509 certificates		4. Matching of Internationalized Email Addresses in X.509 certificates
	In equivalence comparison with smtputf8Name, there may be some setup		In equivalence comparison with smtputf8Name, there may be some setup
	work to enable the comparison i.e. processing of the smtputf8Name		work to enable the comparison i.e. processing of the smtputf8Name
	content or the email address that is being compared against. The		content or the email address that is being compared against. The
	process for setup for comparing with smtputf8Name is split into		process for setup for comparing with smtputf8Name is split into
	domain steps and local-part steps. The comparison form for local-		domain steps and local-part steps. The comparison form for local-
	part always is UTF-8. The comparison form for domain depends on		part always is UTF-8. The comparison form for domain depends on
	context. While some contexts such as certificate path validation in		context. While some contexts such as certificate path validation in
	[RFC5280] specify transforming to A-label, this document RECOMMENDS		[RFC5280] specify transforming to A-label, this document RECOMMENDS
	skipping to change at page 4, line 22 ¶		skipping to change at page 4, line 33 ¶
	transform the A-label to U-label Unicode as specified in section 5.2		transform the A-label to U-label Unicode as specified in section 5.2
	of [RFC5891]. Finally if necessary convert the Unicode to UTF-8 as		of [RFC5891]. Finally if necessary convert the Unicode to UTF-8 as
	specified in section 3 of [RFC3629]. In setup for smtputf8Mailbox,		specified in section 3 of [RFC3629]. In setup for smtputf8Mailbox,
	the email address local-part MUST be converted to UTF-8 if it is not		the email address local-part MUST be converted to UTF-8 if it is not
	already. The <Local-part> part of an Internationalized email address		already. The <Local-part> part of an Internationalized email address
	is already in UTF-8. For the rfc822Name local-part is IA5String		is already in UTF-8. For the rfc822Name local-part is IA5String
	(ASCII), and conversion to UTF-8 is trivial since ASCII octets maps		(ASCII), and conversion to UTF-8 is trivial since ASCII octets maps
	to UTF-8 without change. Once the setup is completed, comparison is		to UTF-8 without change. Once the setup is completed, comparison is
	an octet for octet comparison.		an octet for octet comparison.
			This specification expressly does not define any wildcards characters
			and smtputf8Name comparison implementations MUST NOT interpret any
			character as wildcards. Instead, to specify multiple specifying
			multiple email addresses through smtputf8Name, the certificate should
			use multiple subjectAltNames or issuerAltNames to explicitly carry
			those email addresses.
	5. Name constraints in path validation		5. Name constraints in path validation
	This section defines use of smtputf8Name name for name constraints.		This section defines use of smtputf8Name name for name constraints.
	The format for smtputf8Name in name constraints is identical to the		The format for smtputf8Name in name constraints is identical to the
	use in subjectAltName as specified in Section 3 with the extension as		use in subjectAltName as specified in Section 3 with the extension as
	noted there for partial productions.		noted there for partial productions.
	Constraint comparison on complete email address with smtputf8Name		Constraint comparison on complete email address with smtputf8Name
	name uses the matching procedure defined by Section 4. As with		name uses the matching procedure defined by Section 4. As with
	rfc822Name name constraints as specified in Section 4.2.1.10 of		rfc822Name name constraints as specified in Section 4.2.1.10 of
	[RFC5280], smtputf8Name name can specify a particular mailbox, all		[RFC5280], smtputf8Name name can specify a particular mailbox, all
	addresses at a host, or all mailboxes in a domain by specifying the		addresses at a host, or all mailboxes in a domain by specifying the
	complete email address, a host name, or a domain.		complete email address, a host name, or a domain.
	Name constraint comparisons in the context [RFC5280] is specified		Name constraint comparisons in the context [RFC5280] is specified
	with smtputf8Name name are only done on the subjectAltName		with smtputf8Name name are only done on the subjectAltName (and
	smtputf8Name name, and says nothing more about constaints on other		issuerAltName) smtputf8Name name, and says nothing more about
	email address forms such as rfc822Name. Consequently it may be		constaints on other email address forms such as rfc822Name.
	necessary to include other name constraints such as rfc822Name in		Consequently it may be necessary to include other name constraints
	addition to smtputf8Name to constrain all potential email addresses.		such as rfc822Name in addition to smtputf8Name to constrain all
	For example a domain with both ascii and non-ascii local-part email		potential email addresses. For example a domain with both ascii and
	addresses may require both rfc822Name and smtputf8Name name		non-ascii local-part email addresses may require both rfc822Name and
	constraints. This can be illustrated in the following Figure 1 which		smtputf8Name name constraints. This can be illustrated in the
	shows a name constraint set in the intermediate CA certificate, which		following non-normative diagram Figure 1 which shows a name
	then applies to the children entity certificates. Note that a		constraint set in the intermediate CA certificate, which then applies
	constraint on rfc822Name does not apply to smtputf8Name and vice		to the children entity certificates. Note that a constraint on
	versa.		rfc822Name does not apply to smtputf8Name and vice versa.
	+-------------------------------------------------+		+------------------------------------------------------+
	| Root CA Cert |		| Root CA Cert |
	+-------------------------------------------------+		+------------------------------------------------------+
	|		|
	v		v
	+-------------------------------------------------+		+------------------------------------------------------+
	| Intermediate CA Cert |		| Intermediate CA Cert |
	| Name Constraint Extension |		| Name Constraint Extension |
	| Permitted |		| Permitted |
	| rfc822Name: allowed.com |		| rfc822Name: allowed.example.com |
	| smtputf8Name: allowed.com |		| smtputf8Name: allowed.example.com |
	| Excluded |		| Excluded |
	| rfc822Name: ignored.com |		| rfc822Name: ignored.example.com |
	+-------------------------------------------------+		+------------------------------------------------------+
	| |		| |
	v |		v |
	+-------------------------------------------------+		+------------------------------------------------------+
	| Entity Cert (w/explicitly permitted subjects) |		| Entity Cert (w/explicitly permitted subjects) |
	| SubjectAltName Extension |		| SubjectAltName Extension |
	| rfc822Name: student@allowed.com |		| rfc822Name: student@allowed.example.com |
	| smtputf8Name: \u8001\u5E2B@allowed.com |		| smtputf8Name: \u8001\u5E2B@allowed.example.com |
	+-------------------------------------------------+		+------------------------------------------------------+
	|		|
	v		v
	+-------------------------------------------------+		+------------------------------------------------------+
	| Entity Cert (w/permitted subject- excluded |		| Entity Cert (w/permitted subject- excluded |
	| rfc822Name does not exclude smtputf8Name) |		| rfc822Name does not exclude smtputf8Name) |
	| SubjectAltName Extension |		| SubjectAltName Extension |
	| smtputf8Name: \u4E0D\u5C0D@ignored.com |		| smtputf8Name: \u4E0D\u5C0D@ignored.example.com |
	+-------------------------------------------------+		+------------------------------------------------------+
	Figure 1		Figure 1
	6. Resource Considerations		6. Resource Considerations
	For email addresses whose local-part is ASCII it may be more		For email addresses whose local-part is ASCII it may be more
	reasonable to continue using rfc822Name instead of smtputf8Name. Use		reasonable to continue using rfc822Name instead of smtputf8Name. Use
	of smtputf8Name incurs higher byte representation overhead due to		of smtputf8Name incurs higher byte representation overhead due to
	encoding with otherName and the additional OID needed. This document		encoding with otherName and the additional OID needed. This document
	RECOMMENDS using smtputf8Name when local-part contains non-ASCII		RECOMMENDS using smtputf8Name when local-part contains non-ASCII
	characters, and otherwise rfc822Name.		characters, and otherwise rfc822Name.
	7. IANA Considerations		7. Security Considerations
	[[CREF1: Just need a new OID.]]		Use for smtputf8Name for certificate subjectAltName (and
			issuerAltName) will incur many of the same security considerations of
			Section 8 in [RFC5280] but further complicated by permitting non-
			ASCII characters in the email address local-part. As mentioned in
			Section 4.4 of [RFC5890] and in Section 4 of [RFC6532] Unicode
			introduces the risk for visually similar characters which can be
			exploited to deceive the recipient. The former document references
			some means to mitigate against these attacks.
	8. Security Considerations		8. IANA Considerations
	Use for smtputf8Name for certificate subjectAltName will incur many		This document makes use of object identifiers for the smtputf8Name
	of the same security considerations of Section 8 in [RFC5280] but		defined in Section Section 3 and the ASN.1 module identifier defined
	further complicated by permitting non-ASCII characters in the email		in Section Appendix A. IANA is kindly requested to make the
	address local-part. As mentioned in Section 4.4 of [RFC5890] and in		following assignments for:
	Section 4 of [RFC6532] Unicode introduces the risk for visually
	similar characters which can be exploited to deceive the recipient.		The LAMPS-EaiAddresses-2016 ASN.1 module in the "SMI Security for
	The former document references some means to mitigate against these		PKIX Module Identifier" registry (1.3.6.1.5.5.7.0).
	attacks.
			The smtputf8Name otherName in the "PKIX Other Name Forms" registry
			(1.3.6.1.5.5.7.8).
	9. References		9. References
	9.1. Normative References		9.1. Normative References
	[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate		[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
	Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119,		Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119,
	DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997,		DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997,
	<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>.		<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>.
	skipping to change at page 7, line 5 ¶		skipping to change at page 8, line 15 ¶
	[RFC5890] Klensin, J., "Internationalized Domain Names for		[RFC5890] Klensin, J., "Internationalized Domain Names for
	Applications (IDNA): Definitions and Document Framework",		Applications (IDNA): Definitions and Document Framework",
	RFC 5890, DOI 10.17487/RFC5890, August 2010,		RFC 5890, DOI 10.17487/RFC5890, August 2010,
	<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5890>.		<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5890>.
	[RFC5891] Klensin, J., "Internationalized Domain Names in		[RFC5891] Klensin, J., "Internationalized Domain Names in
	Applications (IDNA): Protocol", RFC 5891,		Applications (IDNA): Protocol", RFC 5891,
	DOI 10.17487/RFC5891, August 2010,		DOI 10.17487/RFC5891, August 2010,
	<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5891>.		<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5891>.
			[RFC5912] Hoffman, P. and J. Schaad, "New ASN.1 Modules for the
			Public Key Infrastructure Using X.509 (PKIX)", RFC 5912,
			DOI 10.17487/RFC5912, June 2010,
			<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5912>.
	[RFC6531] Yao, J. and W. Mao, "SMTP Extension for Internationalized		[RFC6531] Yao, J. and W. Mao, "SMTP Extension for Internationalized
	Email", RFC 6531, DOI 10.17487/RFC6531, February 2012,		Email", RFC 6531, DOI 10.17487/RFC6531, February 2012,
	<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6531>.		<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6531>.
	[RFC6532] Yang, A., Steele, S., and N. Freed, "Internationalized		[RFC6532] Yang, A., Steele, S., and N. Freed, "Internationalized
	Email Headers", RFC 6532, DOI 10.17487/RFC6532, February		Email Headers", RFC 6532, DOI 10.17487/RFC6532, February
	2012, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6532>.		2012, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6532>.
	9.2. Informative References		9.2. Informative References
	[RFC5322] Resnick, P., Ed., "Internet Message Format", RFC 5322,		[RFC5322] Resnick, P., Ed., "Internet Message Format", RFC 5322,
	DOI 10.17487/RFC5322, October 2008,		DOI 10.17487/RFC5322, October 2008,
	<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5322>.		<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5322>.
	Appendix A. Acknowledgements		Appendix A. ASN.1 Module
			The following ASN.1 module normatively specifies the Smtputf8Name
			structure. This specification uses the ASN.1 definitions from
			[RFC5912] with the 2002 ASN.1 notation used in that document.
			LAMPS-EaiAddresses-2016
			{ iso(1) identified-organization(3) dod(6)
			internet(1) security(5) mechanisms(5) pkix(7) id-mod(0)
			id-mod-lamps-eai-addresses-2016(88) }
			DEFINITIONS IMPLICIT TAGS ::=
			BEGIN
			IMPORTS
			id-pkix OBJECT IDENTIFIER ::=
			{iso(1) identified-organization(3) dod(6) internet(1) security(5)
			mechanisms(5) pkix(7)}
			--
			-- otherName carries additional name types for subjectAltName, issuerAltName,
			-- and other uses of GeneralNames.
			--
			-- Note that the LAMPS-EaiAddresses-2016 module and id-on-smtputf8Name OID
			-- uses example IANA numbers i.e. are non-normative.
			--
			id-on OBJECT IDENTIFIER ::= { id-pkix 8 }
			SmtpUtf8OtherNames OTHER-NAME ::= { on-smtputf8Name, ... }
			on-smtputf8Name OTHER-NAME ::= {
			SmtpUtf8Name IDENTIFIED BY id-on-smtputf8Name
			}
			id-on-smtputf8Name OBJECT IDENTIFIER ::= { id-on 9 }
			SmtpUtf8Name ::= UTF8String (SIZE (1..MAX))
			END
			Figure 2
			Appendix B. Acknowledgements
	Thank you to Magnus Nystrom for motivating this document. Thanks to		Thank you to Magnus Nystrom for motivating this document. Thanks to
	Nicolas Lidzborski, Laetitia Baudoin, Ryan Sleevi and Sean Leonard		Russ Housley, Nicolas Lidzborski, Laetitia Baudoin, Ryan Sleevi, Sean
	for their early feedback. Also thanks to John Klensin for his		Leonard, Sean Turner, and Jim Schaad for their feedback. Also thanks
	valuable input on internationalization, Unicode and ABNF formatting.		to John Klensin for his valuable input on internationalization,
			Unicode and ABNF formatting.
	Authors' Addresses		Authors' Addresses
	Alexey Melnikov (editor)		Alexey Melnikov (editor)
	Isode Ltd		Isode Ltd
	14 Castle Mews		14 Castle Mews
	Hampton, Middlesex TW12 2NP		Hampton, Middlesex TW12 2NP
	UK		UK
	Email: Alexey.Melnikov@isode.com		Email: Alexey.Melnikov@isode.com
End of changes. 20 change blocks.
	91 lines changed or deleted		166 lines changed or added
This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.45. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/