Re: (Not-so) hypothetical question: What to do about NULs?

[Michael Richardson]

Ken Hornstein <kenh@pobox.com> wrote:
    > I'm sitting down to write or modify nmh code.  Right now we have a lot
    > of code that assumes NUL-terminated C strings are safe to represent
    > email everywhere.  My question is: is that a valid assumption?  If
    > we are making that assumption, fine, let's be explicit and if someone
    > DOES encounter a NUL in modern email, we tell them to suck it.

I think that this is the minimum that we must do.

    > If we all agree that is NOT a valid assumption, then fine, going forward
    > we should eventually fix that, or target new APIs that fix that.  If

    >> The IETF "modern SMTP" stuff John Klensin is working on (with others) 
might
    >> want to talk to that: a lot of the ICANN UA stuff is a push for UTF-8 
clean
    >> across the board.

    > I do not think this is relevant to this discussion, unless they are
    > changing RFC 5322s position on NULs.

But, it seems like a question that IETF could clarify.

--
Michael Richardson <mcr+IETF@sandelman.ca>   . o O ( IPv6 IøT consulting )
           Sandelman Software Works Inc, Ottawa and Worldwide

signature.asc
Description: PGP signature