RFC 6533: Internationalized Delivery Status and Disposition Notifications
In plain English — editorial summary, not part of the RFC
Delivery status notifications (DSNs) are critical to the correct operation of an email system. However, the existing Draft Standards (RFC 3461, RFC 3464, RFC 6522) are presently limited to ASCII text in the machine-readable portions of the protocol. This specification adds a new address type for international email addresses so an original recipient address with non-ASCII characters can be correctly preserved even after downgrading. This also provides updated content return media types for delivery status notifications and message disposition notifications to support use of the new address type. This document extends RFC 3461, RFC 3464, RFC 3798, and RFC 6522. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Document record
- Document ID
- RFC6533
- Published
- February 2012
- Authors
- T. Hansen; C. Newman; A. Melnikov
- Status
- PROPOSED STANDARD
- Stream
- IETF
- Area
- app
- Pages
- 19
- Also known as
- —
- Obsoletes:
- RFC 5337
Topics
Related documents
Ranked automatically by shared keywords, IETF area and stream — not by editorial selection.
- RFC 3886An Extensible Message Format for Message Tracking ResponsesCurrent
September 2004
- RFC 3249Implementers Guide for Facsimile Using Internet MailCurrent
September 2002
- RFC 2530Indicating Supported Media Features Using Extensions to DSN and MDNCurrent
March 1999
- RFC 1894An Extensible Message Format for Delivery Status NotificationsObsoleted
January 1996
- RFC 5598Internet Mail ArchitectureCurrent
July 2009
- RFC 5068Email Submission Operations: Access and Accountability RequirementsUpdated
November 2007
- RFC 4412Communications Resource Priority for the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP)Updated
February 2006
- RFC 6532Internationalized Email HeadersCurrent
February 2012
Also filed under
About this page
The document record above — title, authors, date, status, stream, area, relationships, DOI and errata — is imported verbatim from the public RFC Editor index. The “in plain English” section is editorial: written by The metasystema editorial team, not part of the RFC. Where the two differ, the RFC text governs.
Last checked against the RFC Editor index on . RFCs are never revised after publication; changes are issued as new documents.
Data sources · Editorial policy · Report a correction · What is an RFC?