ietf 66 eai wg testing report twnic [email protected]

22
IETF 66 EAI WG Testing Report TWNIC [email protected]

Upload: frederick-neal

Post on 27-Dec-2015

225 views

Category:

Documents


2 download

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: IETF 66 EAI WG Testing Report TWNIC snw@twnic.net.tw

IETF 66 EAI WGTesting Report

TWNIC

[email protected]

Page 2: IETF 66 EAI WG Testing Report TWNIC snw@twnic.net.tw

Outline Introduction Downgrade Scenarios Mailing List POP3 Issue

Page 3: IETF 66 EAI WG Testing Report TWNIC snw@twnic.net.tw

Introduction Base on sendmail

Sendmail complier with Milter (8.13.6) Mimedefang for address/header rewrite (2.56) Most coding by perl (string process) in Mimedefang

Trial System eai1.twnic.tw EAI SMTP (RH9.0, pam + mysql) eai2.twnic.tw EAI SMTP (RH7.3, pam + mysql) downgrade.twnic.tw Original Sendmail version

Test by using ‘telnet’ command

Page 4: IETF 66 EAI WG Testing Report TWNIC snw@twnic.net.tw

Architecture

eai1

eai2

downgrade.twnic.tw

台網中心 .tw (xn--fiq43lrrlz83a.tw)

twnic.net.tw

(All domain are same server)

Envelope From/To & Header downgrade

Envelope To possible upgrade by eai1 to transfer punycode local part to UTF8

Only downgrade Trace Field

Page 5: IETF 66 EAI WG Testing Report TWNIC snw@twnic.net.tw

Reference draft-ietf-eai-framework-00.txt draft-ietf-eai-utf8headers-00.txt draft-ietf-eai-scenarios-01.txt draft-ietf-eai-smtpext-00.txt draft-ietf-eai-mailinglist-00.txt draft-ietf-eai-pop-00.txt draft-ietf-eai-downgrade-01.txt

Page 6: IETF 66 EAI WG Testing Report TWNIC snw@twnic.net.tw

Downgrade -Envelope

Downgrade (eai1 to downgrade) Sender EAI-aware to Destination not EAI-aware Downgrade Envelope From/To

MAIL FROM: <UTF8@UTF8> EAI-Parameter=ATOMIC

RCPT TO: <UTF8@UTF8> EAI-Parameter=ALT-ADDRESS

ATOMIC: UTF8@UTF8 iesg--PUNYCODE@IDN (xn--)

ALD-ADDRESS: to replace address by ALT-ADDRESS

Page 7: IETF 66 EAI WG Testing Report TWNIC snw@twnic.net.tw

Downgrade -Header 8bit Header (UTF8) SHOULD downgrade wit

h MIME UTF-8 information MUST NOT

appear in Received fields Trace Field (Received) ‘for’ clauses downgraded

with punycode Add Header:

I-EMAIL: 1.0;downgraded by EHLO (PTR [IP])

Page 8: IETF 66 EAI WG Testing Report TWNIC snw@twnic.net.tw

Downgrade -Sample (eai1 to downgraade)- SMTP negotiation (telnet from eai2 to eai1)

Page 9: IETF 66 EAI WG Testing Report TWNIC snw@twnic.net.tw

Downgrade (outlook express view)

Page 10: IETF 66 EAI WG Testing Report TWNIC snw@twnic.net.tw

Downgrade (Openwebmail view)

Page 11: IETF 66 EAI WG Testing Report TWNIC snw@twnic.net.tw

Mailing List Base on sendmail mailing list function Format maximum 3 columns

Email EAI-Parameter with ‘{‘ ‘}’ Comments with ‘(‘ ‘)’ in 2822

Page 12: IETF 66 EAI WG Testing Report TWNIC snw@twnic.net.tw

Scenarios A, B and C are i18mail users X,Y and Z are original ascii user L is i18n-aware LA is non-i18n-aware S is Sent success R is Reply Success

Linux ‘mail’ command for EAI to reply Outlook Express for non-EAI to reply

Page 13: IETF 66 EAI WG Testing Report TWNIC snw@twnic.net.tw

Scenario for Draft in TWNIC EAI trial -From EAI

B B,C B,C,

X,Z

L LA L,LA,B,Y L->L,LA

A S

R

S

R

S

R

S

R

S

R

S

R

S

R

Page 14: IETF 66 EAI WG Testing Report TWNIC snw@twnic.net.tw

Scenario for Draft in TWNIC EAI trial – From non-EAI (downgraded)

B B,C B,C,

X,Z

L LA L,LA L->L,LA

X S

R

S

R

S

R

S

R

- S

R

S

R

Page 15: IETF 66 EAI WG Testing Report TWNIC snw@twnic.net.tw

Other Scenarios A to B , relay by non-EAI MTA

eai1 ->downgrade -> eai2 Once downgrade , all downgrade

X to Y , relay by EAI MTA downgrade -> eai1 -> downgrade

Page 16: IETF 66 EAI WG Testing Report TWNIC snw@twnic.net.tw

EAI POP3 TWNIC design a simple i18n-aware POP3 service The POP3 service was developed with PERL langu

age Our key point

‘CAPA’ responses ‘UTF8’ , the MUA can login with UTF8 or punycode (also implement MIME, but we think it is better using punycode). Different encoding map to the same mailbox

‘CAPA’ don’t response ‘UTF8’ , login as punycode, and MDA store mail as punycode mailbox name

Page 17: IETF 66 EAI WG Testing Report TWNIC snw@twnic.net.tw

EAI POP3 Screen Shot

Page 18: IETF 66 EAI WG Testing Report TWNIC snw@twnic.net.tw

Issue 1 May addr-spec change ? Should we have to use E

SMTP argument (such as eai-parameter) ? Make sense MSG from/to regards as envelope from/to bet

ween both EAI MTA Easy to implement in mailing list and parser, not confused i

n other symbols (‘,’ ‘:’ ‘#’ ‘;’ ‘|’ ‘&’…) Some MUA (Outlook) can input and keep ‘{‘ ‘}’ information i

n address book, and transmit ‘<addr {eai-parameter}>’ it to MTA, if EAI MTA is known

When relaying, POSSIBLE ESMTP arguments (Ex: SIZE,AUTH,NOTIFY ) do not pass to next relay EAI MTA, cause EAI-Parameter MAYBE lose the argument.

Broken the addr-spec is not a good idea Any opinion or method is welcome, we need more commen

t for our trail

Page 19: IETF 66 EAI WG Testing Report TWNIC snw@twnic.net.tw

Issue 2 Recommend: alt-separator for mailing list is same

to ‘utf8header’ List-* MAY appear alt-separator before REQUEST-URI

(Query String) List-Id: “Testing \(TWNIC EAI TESTBED\) ” <中文@台網中心 .tw>

Can be null List-Subscribe: <mailto:中文@台網中心 .tw{atomic}?subject=subscrib

e> Using in List-* and URI ‘mailto’

Page 20: IETF 66 EAI WG Testing Report TWNIC snw@twnic.net.tw

Issue 3 EAI-Parameter replaces Envelope From, and

some consideration Alt-address can be assign to another domain

name that is different host from original mail address?

EAI need more detail describe conflicts with other extensions (DSN/MDN/AUTH…etc) and services

EAI need to take care SPAM issue under ALT-ADDRESS

Page 21: IETF 66 EAI WG Testing Report TWNIC snw@twnic.net.tw

Issue 4 SPF will check Sender from MTA, EAI-

parameter is possible confused Is EAI-parameter restricted to MTA domain ? If not restrict, we don’t know how to setup SPF

Page 22: IETF 66 EAI WG Testing Report TWNIC snw@twnic.net.tw

Issue 5 Issue in DKIM

EAI is possible to change Envelope From/To and Message From/To, this action causes ‘h=‘ clause verify failure

EAI-Downgraded-From/EAI-Downgraded-To (or other downgrade header) is in need for DKIM

Whether downgrade header or not, when transmits to destination MTA via MSP, DKIM can’t sign before this

Some small issue in ‘c=relaxed/simple’ when downgrade causes folding/non-folding