Re: Case-sensitive status

Murray S. Kucherawy wrote:

> in a roundabout way they’re case-insensitive because ABNF (RFC5234) says so when
> case-sensitivity isn’t expressly stated.

I use your mail as found in the list archive to test that I can in
fact send mail
to the list, threading will likely fail.  Yes, ABNF is case-insensitive unless
folks go to the trouble and specify cases-sensitive strings in hex. notation.

> Would it break any known implementations to change them to all-lowercase in the
> new RFC, just to be consistent with other things?

It can't, because ABNF is case-insensitive ;-)  There should be test
cases in the
test suite covering this point, in other words, it's mostly a question
of what is
better readable in 4408bis.  In the prose I'd prefer the mixed case
"as is", but
wouldn't waste time with arguing if you think that this is confusing.
In the ABNF
I don't care, lower case instead of camel case is fine.

That part of the ABNF apparently only affects the Received-SPF header
field.  Is
there any chance to get rid of this in 4408bis, e.g., with a pointer
to RFC 4408,
plus some "please use RFC 5451" blurb?  Any "erratum" for Received-SPF should be
listed, I vaguely recall that this is the case, but this could be buried in some
"things you really do not more need to care about" appendix.

-Frank