[UA-discuss] interesting to note about emoji in mailbox name.

Don Hollander don.hollander at icann.org
Wed Apr 17 07:47:52 UTC 2019

Dear all,

I'd like to shift this discussion to the UA-EAI mailing list with a goal of producing a Good Practice Guide for mailbox administrators.

Existing subscribers would have just received a message asking for the start of a discussion of a Good Practice Guide.

If you'd like to participate and are not a subscriber to the UA-EAI mailing list, do please let me know direct (off list) and I'll add you.


Don Hollander
Secretary General

-----Original Message-----
From: UA-discuss <ua-discuss-bounces at icann.org> On Behalf Of John Levine
Sent: Wednesday, 17 April 2019 7:59 AM
To: ua-discuss at icann.org
Subject: Re: [UA-discuss] interesting to note about emoji in mailbox name.

In article <c36e2135-bdc7-7610-0fc2-9071ac8495f1 at ix.netcom.com> you write:
>I think this is intended to cover what I would call "modern, everyday 
>general use", or the letters that people learn in school, as opposed to 
>arcane, outdated, specialized code points for the same languages and 
>scripts that are also in Unicode for use by scholars and other 
>specialized and expert users.

Seems reasonable.  I was hoping we could do something like recommend that mailbox names follow the UTS39 Highly Restrictive profile, with the additional advice that since these are mailboxes and not domain names, if the identifier contains confusable characters that the MTA's mailbox fuzzy match accept all of the confusables as aliases for the name.  This would imply that you can't have two mailboxes that differ only in confusables.

I don't know if there's "almost confusables" like various accented versions of letters, which I would treat as confusables here and accept as aliases.

More information about the UA-discuss mailing list