Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

International email support #23

Closed
antony opened this issue Jun 20, 2016 · 2 comments
Closed

International email support #23

antony opened this issue Jun 20, 2016 · 2 comments
Assignees

Comments

@antony
Copy link

antony commented Jun 20, 2016

I've raised a "bug" against joi's email validator, and it has been suggested by @Marsup that I reference / summarise it here also, since Joi depends on isemail for validation.

The original issue can be found here

We have a number of Danish users who have danish characters in their email addresses. From the research I've done it appears that these are actually invalid email addresses, however there is growing support for international characters across a number of major email providers and smtp/pop3 implementations.

Fundamentally, we'd need to support the email jØrgen@somedomain.com as it is compliant with https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6530 - it is usable on a number of major providers, and registerable as a new email address on another set of providers.

It seems like the existence of these email addresses means that it would be wise to support them, via use of an optional configuration parameter.

As with my example in the linked github issue, using google as an example, would turn this parameter ON for send/receive, and OFF for signups.

My proposal is a configuration parameter something like international: true/false, or compliance: rfc5322/rfc6530, or perhaps even rfc:6530

Note that it does seem that the new RFC rfc6530 is an evolving standard since 2012, but the real-world use of this type of email, and the issues I'm having today make me think that there should be some sort of support for it, as an option.

@skeggse
Copy link
Owner

skeggse commented Jun 20, 2016

Thank you. How is this issue different from #17?

@antony
Copy link
Author

antony commented Jun 20, 2016

Ah, it isn't. That one had totally slipped my notice. I'll close this in favour of #17

@antony antony closed this as completed Jun 20, 2016
@skeggse skeggse self-assigned this Jun 20, 2016
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants