ICANN opens up Pandora's Box of new TLDs
dot at dotat.at
Tue Jul 1 12:10:29 CDT 2008
On Mon, 30 Jun 2008, Jay R. Ashworth wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 30, 2008 at 06:47:30PM +0100, Tony Finch wrote:
> > Trailing dots in email addresses are a syntax error.
> In fact, Mutt (1.2.5) permits the trailing dot, and delivers the mail,
> and all the intervening MTAs (I only tested local mail on my machine,
> running Postfix) let the message through -- it came through apparently
> having been rewritten by Postfix to lose the trailing dot; there was an
> X-Original-To header.
Postfix corrects many syntax errors rather than rejecting erroneous
> Tony: what authority were you depending on for your assertion, and in
> which context do you make it?
It has been true of all internet email addresses since before dots were
introduced into host names.
RFC 2821 section 4.1.2 Command Argument Syntax
Domain = (sub-domain 1*("." sub-domain)) / address-literal
sub-domain = Let-dig [Ldh-str]
Let-dig = ALPHA / DIGIT
Ldh-str = *( ALPHA / DIGIT / "-" ) Let-dig
Note that this does not permit a trailing dot. (It also doesn't permit
single-component domains, but that's due to an editorial mistake.)
Section 4.1.2 of RFC 821 also does not permit trailing dots.
RFC 2822 section 3.4.1 Addr-spec specification
domain = dot-atom / domain-literal / obs-domain
dot-atom = [CFWS] dot-atom-text [CFWS]
dot-atom-text = 1*atext *("." 1*atext)
This also does not permit trailing dots. RFC 822 section 6 is similar.
See also RFC 733, which allows no dots at all.
f.anthony.n.finch <dot at dotat.at> http://dotat.at/
HUMBER THAMES DOVER WIGHT: EAST OR SOUTHEAST 4 OR 5, OCCASIONALLY 6 IN HUMBER,
BECOMING VARIABLE 3 OR 4. SLIGHT OR MODERATE. THUNDERY SHOWERS. MODERATE OR
GOOD, OCCASIONALLY POOR.
More information about the NANOG