From nobody Mon Jul 3 14:53:37 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: precis@ietf.org Delivered-To: precis@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3C972127078; Mon, 3 Jul 2017 14:53:31 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: Ben Campbell To: "The IESG" Cc: draft-ietf-precis-7564bis@ietf.org, Marc Blanchet , precis-chairs@ietf.org, Marc.Blanchet@viagenie.ca, precis@ietf.org X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.55.2 Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Precedence: bulk Message-ID: <149911881124.22832.7633748744729330805.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Mon, 03 Jul 2017 14:53:31 -0700 Archived-At: Subject: [precis] Ben Campbell's Yes on draft-ietf-precis-7564bis-08: (with COMMENT) X-BeenThere: precis@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 List-Id: Preparation and Comparison of Internationalized Strings List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 03 Jul 2017 21:53:31 -0000 Ben Campbell has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-precis-7564bis-08: Yes When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this introductory paragraph, however.) Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-precis-7564bis/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- COMMENT: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Is the 2nd to last paragraph in 13.5 intended as actual instructions to IANA? From nobody Mon Jul 3 16:49:28 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: precis@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: precis@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B24931317E5; Mon, 3 Jul 2017 16:49:22 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.72 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.72 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=stpeter.im header.b=KKcClLkJ; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.b=LOplYB0I Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id UVhGIUjZMOk9; Mon, 3 Jul 2017 16:49:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: from out1-smtp.messagingengine.com (out1-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.25]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AA08E1317ED; Mon, 3 Jul 2017 16:49:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: from compute2.internal (compute2.nyi.internal [10.202.2.42]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0961B2098A; Mon, 3 Jul 2017 19:49:05 -0400 (EDT) Received: from frontend2 ([10.202.2.161]) by compute2.internal (MEProxy); Mon, 03 Jul 2017 19:49:05 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=stpeter.im; h=cc :content-transfer-encoding:content-type:date:from:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:subject:to:x-me-sender :x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc:x-sasl-enc; s=fm1; bh=wD90OZ1BGuX+gpfymU 8s7GaM+Z/kwcqsI+//Nvvq1b0=; b=KKcClLkJ8F5ISNofzRRThEEeqYqX6Ism++ 7CumGX5PdUBybO3MjA+ohRYEE90ssZIlI2QFYIEQchF6ySqS78rG+LdXyzi1Buzr w3rCXuTFPohSRClix+EENIF9vNZTyuX2XlVGV75n42sz7Ht4AJ+k0vyA4Exnip4v E2esm/Wz1ZXHfVGVUj4gFiyjsnGp9U4a+LBAQ0UlomkUDQBL1bJ3ksdciezK4AYW YhXdOc9XzJ0LQStF37UyWcbZUT3v3NXypvra5fYAoGlJxpXCKFaRnJf6VhqBBKS2 vixpTRrzQ58QIRGdAiMHrYEiLuMmm/8rw3IciSlqgz+bwqW0NKOw== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc:x-sasl-enc; s= fm1; bh=wD90OZ1BGuX+gpfymU8s7GaM+Z/kwcqsI+//Nvvq1b0=; b=LOplYB0I GaZgqI/iSJ5J3A1lzj+otHGio5vmO+np3UkolEK7tjBFBsw9RDVPMOs03Lw76KGG PC9h/Wsmow5+xlT+dDHYHQNR20vPQK6KblIrcMLVESsuy1KpCsPEFV7mQrEOOvfL Jg5zcYzVJsaQMDJiRZBIFS5ivq4bnlCaaB+gUSCaMh3522yko9O1g6h6l434bPwh RUMkIgcq28C7W1eqL7ZAloROsUgBKUVH32aazq2W1VQ5KOdXBsDetw2l3/4J8pv7 uKPW59WiCM7WQL7+MKqCOPJyQ10Tj9t/DeyyKfcXQfbXBQwcBsfkp37AdINKXUJH tGCyhnG3tNSnHg== X-ME-Sender: X-Sasl-enc: 23/cDo5vcSGsEJwu97ajg4BCPlkA/OCx1hag64cmEVUg 1499125744 Received: from [10.0.0.228] (unknown [76.25.4.24]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 4A2412475F; Mon, 3 Jul 2017 19:49:04 -0400 (EDT) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0) From: Peter Saint-Andre X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (14F89) In-Reply-To: <149911881124.22832.7633748744729330805.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Mon, 3 Jul 2017 17:49:03 -0600 Cc: The IESG , draft-ietf-precis-7564bis@ietf.org, precis@ietf.org, precis-chairs@ietf.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <7A34BC2E-57EE-43A9-8A44-AC976BE0BBEA@stpeter.im> References: <149911881124.22832.7633748744729330805.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> To: Ben Campbell Archived-At: Subject: Re: [precis] Ben Campbell's Yes on draft-ietf-precis-7564bis-08: (with COMMENT) X-BeenThere: precis@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: Preparation and Comparison of Internationalized Strings List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 03 Jul 2017 23:49:23 -0000 Thanks for the review. Sent from mobile, might be terse=20 > On Jul 3, 2017, at 3:53 PM, Ben Campbell wrote: >=20 > Ben Campbell has entered the following ballot position for > draft-ietf-precis-7564bis-08: Yes >=20 > When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all > email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this > introductory paragraph, however.) >=20 >=20 > Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html > for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. >=20 >=20 > The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-precis-7564bis/ >=20 >=20 >=20 > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > COMMENT: > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >=20 > Is the 2nd to last paragraph in 13.5 intended as actual instructions to IA= NA? Yes, I think so. Therefore the instruction should be provided in Section 11.= 1, with a forward reference to Section 13.5 for the explanation. Peter >=20 >=20 > _______________________________________________ > precis mailing list > precis@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/precis From nobody Mon Jul 3 16:54:44 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: precis@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: precis@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AFBF9131810; Mon, 3 Jul 2017 16:54:32 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.881 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.881 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, T_SPF_HELO_PERMERROR=0.01, T_SPF_PERMERROR=0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id F2kpi_Yg0z7Y; Mon, 3 Jul 2017 16:54:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nostrum.com (raven-v6.nostrum.com [IPv6:2001:470:d:1130::1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 494EF131804; Mon, 3 Jul 2017 16:54:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [10.0.1.63] (cpe-66-25-7-22.tx.res.rr.com [66.25.7.22]) (authenticated bits=0) by nostrum.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPSA id v63NsDgE058208 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128 verify=NO); Mon, 3 Jul 2017 18:54:13 -0500 (CDT) (envelope-from ben@nostrum.com) X-Authentication-Warning: raven.nostrum.com: Host cpe-66-25-7-22.tx.res.rr.com [66.25.7.22] claimed to be [10.0.1.63] Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 10.3 \(3273\)) From: Ben Campbell In-Reply-To: <7A34BC2E-57EE-43A9-8A44-AC976BE0BBEA@stpeter.im> Date: Mon, 3 Jul 2017 18:54:12 -0500 Cc: The IESG , draft-ietf-precis-7564bis@ietf.org, precis@ietf.org, precis-chairs@ietf.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: <149911881124.22832.7633748744729330805.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <7A34BC2E-57EE-43A9-8A44-AC976BE0BBEA@stpeter.im> To: Peter Saint-Andre X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3273) Archived-At: Subject: Re: [precis] Ben Campbell's Yes on draft-ietf-precis-7564bis-08: (with COMMENT) X-BeenThere: precis@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: Preparation and Comparison of Internationalized Strings List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 03 Jul 2017 23:54:33 -0000 >>=20 >> = ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >> COMMENT: >> = ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >>=20 >> Is the 2nd to last paragraph in 13.5 intended as actual instructions = to IANA? >=20 > Yes, I think so. Therefore the instruction should be provided in = Section 11.1, with a forward reference to Section 13.5 for the = explanation. Is it possible to word the text to be added to 11.1 to minimize the need = for IANA to make subjective decisions? Thanks! Ben.= From nobody Mon Jul 3 17:04:27 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: precis@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: precis@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 391A312F251; Mon, 3 Jul 2017 17:04:26 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.72 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.72 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=stpeter.im header.b=BcV1VW2x; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.b=lSza8JRE Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id JpYWIDSzyHiO; Mon, 3 Jul 2017 17:04:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: from out1-smtp.messagingengine.com (out1-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.25]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E8AE5131699; Mon, 3 Jul 2017 17:04:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: from compute2.internal (compute2.nyi.internal [10.202.2.42]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 50FC320A27; Mon, 3 Jul 2017 20:04:23 -0400 (EDT) Received: from frontend2 ([10.202.2.161]) by compute2.internal (MEProxy); Mon, 03 Jul 2017 20:04:23 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=stpeter.im; h=cc :content-transfer-encoding:content-type:date:from:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:subject:to:x-me-sender :x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc:x-sasl-enc; s=fm1; bh=oVl+Dm4YLw6CmQABZm uRrwd7nbErFZwC9W8eHF2r3cI=; b=BcV1VW2xMjG5JcflI6Z1UY8lYgsYCE4vd6 Xxx0BVnb8WWuzlziaoF0NyfztnN59Q1GkEVnFDzB32SGWC0hYmtsfCgBhW2bYzzM Px8a3NLAVFbHDUDvFHxBJUNdB1Aa15pLODjPeZCtr9Cop9KCihySsmx9H2e7DGXk NVn5AN2FPzoHQBc/sykfxEeooAMVinJHQCjAwAzQ2C+Yz7eCno9sr2Wc2KshNzM+ U8d8MaJP3lXDlUlDOmn1i+BSs2LLjKJq+jbfPf8Y+AfrS2AVpT+LvN6B4gNzI32v Tl9oMOJfhK7tNyfnjyBX/BsxPZ8BOENspvUHyUsm5rMK7SOvG1gg== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc:x-sasl-enc; s= fm1; bh=oVl+Dm4YLw6CmQABZmuRrwd7nbErFZwC9W8eHF2r3cI=; b=lSza8JRE rfCE7QXcueFV+40b5JhMwmum5AUO17Hqf/P8IzBcAjVnSkNDJyIQXVhV+m+6p/JS TJm2WZJo8p+cQZ+BaiXJgclcUlBh7hjIDPSzHoUJya23Pj1Q1LzNDEyblxM8N00k WTK8/AKSTZvRVF+7wGkxOKZTPY2jifhcYuKfyBhYhfbvlX27tvfAo8C8CVQOR5AA NfbvXRrBWCdgKKxL3W8vAIUG6QP3Uuttu/R4VM9e5/egdw3mlFmDqeiX+DJneGGE 8XibTM3Wk1dxr3CMt4/W4UB3ZDWse9u5FUnxlTqmWhsOx/bSAfi3RSNcQVoLY+AF E7P+JgzhMEsBPg== X-ME-Sender: X-Sasl-enc: N/1/13Gjw8Lk2OjueavOQjVHE7kxcAAVmOMB56/DPrmm 1499126662 Received: from [10.0.0.228] (unknown [76.25.4.24]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id EEAFE2474F; Mon, 3 Jul 2017 20:04:22 -0400 (EDT) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0) From: Peter Saint-Andre X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (14F89) In-Reply-To: Date: Mon, 3 Jul 2017 18:04:22 -0600 Cc: The IESG , draft-ietf-precis-7564bis@ietf.org, precis@ietf.org, precis-chairs@ietf.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <51B82F94-462A-493D-ADB4-06B4198DC37C@stpeter.im> References: <149911881124.22832.7633748744729330805.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <7A34BC2E-57EE-43A9-8A44-AC976BE0BBEA@stpeter.im> To: Ben Campbell Archived-At: Subject: Re: [precis] Ben Campbell's Yes on draft-ietf-precis-7564bis-08: (with COMMENT) X-BeenThere: precis@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: Preparation and Comparison of Internationalized Strings List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 04 Jul 2017 00:04:26 -0000 > On Jul 3, 2017, at 5:54 PM, Ben Campbell wrote: >=20 >=20 >>>=20 >>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> COMMENT: >>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>=20 >>> Is the 2nd to last paragraph in 13.5 intended as actual instructions to I= ANA? >>=20 >> Yes, I think so. Therefore the instruction should be provided in Section 1= 1.1, with a forward reference to Section 13.5 for the explanation. >=20 > Is it possible to word the text to be added to 11.1 to minimize the need f= or IANA to make subjective decisions? >=20 > Thanks! >=20 > Ben. Yes, I will propose text tomorrow. Peter= From nobody Tue Jul 4 07:00:15 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: precis@ietf.org Delivered-To: precis@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EEB0C13160C; Tue, 4 Jul 2017 07:00:04 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: Warren Kumari To: "The IESG" Cc: draft-ietf-precis-7700bis@ietf.org, Marc Blanchet , precis-chairs@ietf.org, Marc.Blanchet@viagenie.ca, precis@ietf.org, n.brownlee@auckland.ac.nz X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.55.2 Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Precedence: bulk Message-ID: <149917680497.16196.1031906736252440526.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Tue, 04 Jul 2017 07:00:04 -0700 Archived-At: Subject: [precis] Warren Kumari's No Objection on draft-ietf-precis-7700bis-08: (with COMMENT) X-BeenThere: precis@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 List-Id: Preparation and Comparison of Internationalized Strings List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 04 Jul 2017 14:00:12 -0000 Warren Kumari has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-precis-7700bis-08: No Objection When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this introductory paragraph, however.) Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-precis-7700bis/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- COMMENT: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- This is wildly outside my area of expertise -- about the only thing I know about PRECIS, Unicode, internationalization and similar is that it is tricky and subtle. I'm balloting No Objection with the belief that the author and AD understand this stuff :-) I would like to point out the OpsDir review from Nevil: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/review-ietf-precis-7700bis-07-opsdir-lc-brownlee-2017-06-19/ (which, I see, you have already responded to). From nobody Tue Jul 4 10:05:56 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: precis@ietf.org Delivered-To: precis@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 087201323FE; Tue, 4 Jul 2017 10:05:55 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: Benoit Claise To: "The IESG" Cc: draft-ietf-precis-7564bis@ietf.org, Marc Blanchet , precis-chairs@ietf.org, Marc.Blanchet@viagenie.ca, precis@ietf.org X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.55.2 Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Precedence: bulk Message-ID: <149918795503.16149.15701121996952765428.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Tue, 04 Jul 2017 10:05:55 -0700 Archived-At: Subject: [precis] Benoit Claise's No Objection on draft-ietf-precis-7564bis-08: (with COMMENT) X-BeenThere: precis@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 List-Id: Preparation and Comparison of Internationalized Strings List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 04 Jul 2017 17:05:55 -0000 Benoit Claise has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-precis-7564bis-08: No Objection When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this introductory paragraph, however.) Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-precis-7564bis/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- COMMENT: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- If it helps anybody... https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff/rfcdiff.pyht?url1=https://tools.ietf.org/rfc/rfc7564.txt&url2=https://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-ietf-precis-7564bis-08.txt From nobody Tue Jul 4 16:28:37 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: precis@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: precis@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 011801315E8; Tue, 4 Jul 2017 16:28:36 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.721 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.721 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=stpeter.im header.b=mzVZwMqm; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.b=JbzbiJ50 Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id n5EXuefN8lpg; Tue, 4 Jul 2017 16:28:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: from out2-smtp.messagingengine.com (out2-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.26]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 177ED12F257; Tue, 4 Jul 2017 16:28:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: from compute2.internal (compute2.nyi.internal [10.202.2.42]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 444D321C27; Tue, 4 Jul 2017 19:28:33 -0400 (EDT) Received: from frontend1 ([10.202.2.160]) by compute2.internal (MEProxy); Tue, 04 Jul 2017 19:28:33 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=stpeter.im; h=cc :content-transfer-encoding:content-type:date:from:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:subject:to:x-me-sender :x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc:x-sasl-enc; s=fm1; bh=e8ZnwYWveDOVzedTrO +c6/8vQRw5mWYZ9jv3LrKyc+8=; b=mzVZwMqm1X+qXhp4/YyeCik4bUfleHGh2G shjTaien+WlWvYXIT8FZHEWcDqu/2g7YrajzkOpG7Y4+lhWGdOtQBmB1/7mqXuxr FKayUz5/jCZAoc3ZAvBqWwJgCibNPmOcV2pAD5t+UkO5bEUTDuRg9/waZa/QMoqf tzvpWl475FvmBxsM7EpTBnuIweU+2kxaAD/X9G89ohRs3bkFvbzjrUnTv3EkFnYJ XZVZWCXwI6d6NwkO8DLjAkD+OtmIySk0X+Lk/MnZfd9vRWJL0gTbe+BWmt87oEhF h8rZwIRYYkPLcmDwjT8N3QwWW198cilLk/VJfjhM8yAHLL1KJysQ== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc:x-sasl-enc; s= fm1; bh=e8ZnwYWveDOVzedTrO+c6/8vQRw5mWYZ9jv3LrKyc+8=; b=JbzbiJ50 OAfVp/+SyFipq1e7LS/6jzWCs1ksv63pQxS0lsO/VkhZxyHB3a6BI4XZvJCj935p J9wtEeqEa0uIIEYjcJJIckEq9u2b3twNzNToGIGU0EfyEGpJlkH+qvgtJDHSR7NT 9O6wQMM0SF687Jj0+VbLLaMn+2JmjnRbHqMS1uhkH/IW6gzNgIHwdxO3q+PEgdeG gUFUnKoFrsnUCb4Mx2DGlAugMmmOXcZvJ7xi11QKq82ugHMBLY0djHMvleWQ/kCZ b3WQJqDGK3iHreEk9M0lhTR72yRkxFfA7HQvTavbPKxiFZnWQvkSK995mX/lkk5T e1ah8bn2aM2xbw== X-ME-Sender: X-Sasl-enc: YlNdL6E4XJe8dTBUKWVGld9OZVEIf7sZtfvvKp825n0j 1499210912 Received: from aither.local (unknown [76.25.4.24]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 4A6327E4AA; Tue, 4 Jul 2017 19:28:32 -0400 (EDT) To: Ben Campbell References: <149911881124.22832.7633748744729330805.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <7A34BC2E-57EE-43A9-8A44-AC976BE0BBEA@stpeter.im> <51B82F94-462A-493D-ADB4-06B4198DC37C@stpeter.im> Cc: The IESG , draft-ietf-precis-7564bis@ietf.org, precis@ietf.org, precis-chairs@ietf.org From: Peter Saint-Andre Message-ID: Date: Tue, 4 Jul 2017 17:28:31 -0600 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.12; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <51B82F94-462A-493D-ADB4-06B4198DC37C@stpeter.im> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Archived-At: Subject: Re: [precis] Ben Campbell's Yes on draft-ietf-precis-7564bis-08: (with COMMENT) X-BeenThere: precis@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: Preparation and Comparison of Internationalized Strings List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 04 Jul 2017 23:28:36 -0000 On 7/3/17 6:04 PM, Peter Saint-Andre wrote: > > >> On Jul 3, 2017, at 5:54 PM, Ben Campbell wrote: >> >> >>>> >>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>> COMMENT: >>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>> >>>> Is the 2nd to last paragraph in 13.5 intended as actual instructions to IANA? >>> >>> Yes, I think so. Therefore the instruction should be provided in Section 11.1, with a forward reference to Section 13.5 for the explanation. >> >> Is it possible to word the text to be added to 11.1 to minimize the need for IANA to make subjective decisions? >> >> Thanks! >> >> Ben. > > Yes, I will propose text tomorrow. > > Peter > I propose that we leave Section 13.5 as it is and add the following paragraph to the end of Section 11.1: Note: IANA is requested to not make further updates to this registry until the issues described in [IAB-Statement] and Section 13.5 have been settled. Peter From nobody Tue Jul 4 22:30:16 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: precis@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: precis@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F365F129ADE; Tue, 4 Jul 2017 22:30:14 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.88 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.88 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, T_SPF_HELO_PERMERROR=0.01, T_SPF_PERMERROR=0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id pOaJFQItqIn0; Tue, 4 Jul 2017 22:30:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nostrum.com (raven-v6.nostrum.com [IPv6:2001:470:d:1130::1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 92F8C127076; Tue, 4 Jul 2017 22:30:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [10.0.1.63] (cpe-66-25-7-22.tx.res.rr.com [66.25.7.22]) (authenticated bits=0) by nostrum.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPSA id v655UBbp045243 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128 verify=NO); Wed, 5 Jul 2017 00:30:12 -0500 (CDT) (envelope-from ben@nostrum.com) X-Authentication-Warning: raven.nostrum.com: Host cpe-66-25-7-22.tx.res.rr.com [66.25.7.22] claimed to be [10.0.1.63] Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 10.3 \(3273\)) From: Ben Campbell In-Reply-To: Date: Wed, 5 Jul 2017 00:30:12 -0500 Cc: The IESG , draft-ietf-precis-7564bis@ietf.org, precis@ietf.org, precis-chairs@ietf.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <62C8417C-4640-4518-AB31-C6525125E5FF@nostrum.com> References: <149911881124.22832.7633748744729330805.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <7A34BC2E-57EE-43A9-8A44-AC976BE0BBEA@stpeter.im> <51B82F94-462A-493D-ADB4-06B4198DC37C@stpeter.im> To: Peter Saint-Andre X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3273) Archived-At: Subject: Re: [precis] Ben Campbell's Yes on draft-ietf-precis-7564bis-08: (with COMMENT) X-BeenThere: precis@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: Preparation and Comparison of Internationalized Strings List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 05 Jul 2017 05:30:15 -0000 > On Jul 4, 2017, at 6:28 PM, Peter Saint-Andre = wrote: >=20 > I propose that we leave Section 13.5 as it is and add the following > paragraph to the end of Section 11.1: >=20 > Note: IANA is requested to not make further updates to this registry > until the issues described in [IAB-Statement] and Section 13.5 have > been settled. How will IANA know when those issues are settled? Should this be an = =E2=80=9Cuntil further notice=E2=80=9D sort of thing? (Which would lead = to the question of notice from whom). Ben.= From nobody Wed Jul 5 06:05:34 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: precis@ietf.org Delivered-To: precis@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5560A131CF0; Wed, 5 Jul 2017 06:05:32 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: Warren Kumari To: "The IESG" Cc: draft-ietf-precis-7564bis@ietf.org, Marc Blanchet , precis-chairs@ietf.org, Marc.Blanchet@viagenie.ca, precis@ietf.org X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.55.2 Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Precedence: bulk Message-ID: <149925993234.17545.11533430766237537740.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Wed, 05 Jul 2017 06:05:32 -0700 Archived-At: Subject: [precis] Warren Kumari's No Objection on draft-ietf-precis-7564bis-08: (with COMMENT) X-BeenThere: precis@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 List-Id: Preparation and Comparison of Internationalized Strings List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 05 Jul 2017 13:05:32 -0000 Warren Kumari has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-precis-7564bis-08: No Objection When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this introductory paragraph, however.) Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-precis-7564bis/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- COMMENT: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Thanks Benoit, the diff was helpful. It seems a bit odd to be doing a -bis for a document ~2 years old, and the draft started <1 year after publication - are we likely to see a -bis of this newly published doc as soon? From nobody Wed Jul 5 06:42:40 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: precis@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: precis@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0548C131D0D; Wed, 5 Jul 2017 06:42:40 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.72 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.72 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=cooperw.in header.b=EGUO2Bea; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.b=FFFdNVcs Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id sl307kb6SwPZ; Wed, 5 Jul 2017 06:42:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: from out2-smtp.messagingengine.com (out2-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.26]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9C508132A30; Wed, 5 Jul 2017 06:42:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: from compute7.internal (compute7.nyi.internal [10.202.2.47]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id B8E3620890; Wed, 5 Jul 2017 09:42:36 -0400 (EDT) Received: from frontend1 ([10.202.2.160]) by compute7.internal (MEProxy); Wed, 05 Jul 2017 09:42:36 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=cooperw.in; h=cc :content-transfer-encoding:content-type:date:from:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:subject:to:x-me-sender :x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc:x-sasl-enc; s=fm1; bh=hf4zMfNS7pzGOm3MOG 1vJJZ/StnkPLMc/QUa3sOvxJE=; b=EGUO2BeaV413GKOoXEqM9oxpaEirSYazRQ PiPXhz1Fuw5F3SKOU8H5owbcd+CxVg6ETgwn7HXqXtIjUTWhw33hdKpJf3qSXxsV j12IDTb438oYlqOBRQRj8Az87h4bab+SseWTMKAIjDMNNdQrnla404LIMN+ruEw9 05vFlGvrK1IJ3tsXJxuX2Ij80+jX3DEphrl0JxIdKJZAV9HYynXBA5c1nSdYxH81 ECysj7LXAum3xPTBlj3rcaK2EMOlQMVXXNqCRnlJY8N7pCAptK04i/1WQG2Bb7pk 72RCMHF5vhMdOPk3q78x6gDaZX+xR1qx4XCG7v36gByB1yLVFmwA== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc:x-sasl-enc; s= fm1; bh=hf4zMfNS7pzGOm3MOG1vJJZ/StnkPLMc/QUa3sOvxJE=; b=FFFdNVcs njva+Pt6XGmyNOilYdlifL77hSK2YuR8uwESZOEBBPbGmaM43KGH7/r8VF9cc1X9 5CllUht4Crm1aih9yUOmEziip/QsMMHRtgjK7ZpNENhWQc/H0gTLEyon+tGmj4/N lBihUlxn7emHatFINornZ5+V48WhNY0LwsUuimxkXf7arH3so13/CPEU50ScPjP0 0sZ/iATP5Ipz/pfeRPjQBAJqsPjZrKwZ768yebDOL8rrSLo+04f57gQceh7bTfXh ahi0qz2vTXPxfWlOfEuYXB1N6e25n6xF8MDcjgFXunoeYElKx+uxSGksFd3uVbQ5 A5NHZTh/mEEjEg== X-ME-Sender: X-Sasl-enc: +WK5JDrQvsHB0+hetNn/tLBKv9n199aKnlINsIaeR5Zt 1499262156 Received: from sjc-alcoop-8814.cisco.com (unknown [128.107.241.163]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id B9D427E755; Wed, 5 Jul 2017 09:42:35 -0400 (EDT) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 9.3 \(3124\)) From: Alissa Cooper In-Reply-To: <149876614410.27838.18091001653680250992@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Wed, 5 Jul 2017 09:42:33 -0400 Cc: gen-art , draft-ietf-precis-7700bis.all@ietf.org, precis@ietf.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: <149876614410.27838.18091001653680250992@ietfa.amsl.com> To: Russ Housley X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3124) Archived-At: Subject: Re: [precis] [Gen-art] Genart telechat review of draft-ietf-precis-7700bis-08 X-BeenThere: precis@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: Preparation and Comparison of Internationalized Strings List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 05 Jul 2017 13:42:40 -0000 Russ, thanks for your reviews. Peter, thanks for addressing Russ=E2=80=99s= comment. I have entered a No Objection ballot position. Alissa > On Jun 29, 2017, at 3:55 PM, Russ Housley = wrote: >=20 > Reviewer: Russ Housley > Review result: Ready >=20 > I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Area > Review Team (Gen-ART) reviews all IETF documents being processed > by the IESG for the IETF Chair. Please wait for direction from your > document shepherd or AD before posting a new version of the draft. >=20 > For more information, please see the FAQ at > . >=20 > Document: draft-ietf-precis-7700bis-08 > Reviewer: Russ Housley > Review Date: 2017-06-29 > IETF LC End Date: 2017-06-13 > IESG Telechat date: 2017-07-06 >=20 > Summary: Ready >=20 > Major Concerns: None >=20 > Minor Concerns: None >=20 > Nits: None >=20 > Thanks for addressing the concern that was raised in my earlier = review. >=20 >=20 > _______________________________________________ > Gen-art mailing list > Gen-art@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art From nobody Wed Jul 5 06:52:45 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: precis@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: precis@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E2CB7129B64; Wed, 5 Jul 2017 06:52:38 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.72 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.72 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=cooperw.in header.b=KmibRpWz; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.b=Cm1lTCNm Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 1l_xs004K7Ud; Wed, 5 Jul 2017 06:52:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from out2-smtp.messagingengine.com (out2-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.26]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 193E1131D12; Wed, 5 Jul 2017 06:52:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from compute7.internal (compute7.nyi.internal [10.202.2.47]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7F1FE207FE; Wed, 5 Jul 2017 09:52:31 -0400 (EDT) Received: from frontend1 ([10.202.2.160]) by compute7.internal (MEProxy); Wed, 05 Jul 2017 09:52:31 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=cooperw.in; h=cc :content-transfer-encoding:content-type:date:from:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:subject:to:x-me-sender :x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc:x-sasl-enc; s=fm1; bh=ws0KqdvFH3XwtXp5R3 fFs/7uB8dKBgNgbbf0sLlqWSQ=; b=KmibRpWz/2i6dSkYm7kE6lcNoArMVLDtAo p0VLvzSaHD5DeC6wdCv9zUYoK+MDEHyRE+PVZMKxX3+pv/ZgYB4KDxCJcYErbmvh bIDUZBsy9u7+WXdKNWiihP10qRCbC4JoFb8K3MGXUPMjg7F9gW1dDpb7Lscw7RTa yg+Hh+3kFQ5UcW3KYTAWjY7ag0AdDAxjXMF75d9H4bq78ykThhz3cvAmTZ76f+AP rL/RFbaw1LVJ4XIyyFIDBjvc4j4ZPARBwmmXGZmV0MM3e9nWJ4Lda+Z7oBOtXzAJ DNorZvzxlGX6RMjNZDiRL8xjDbZGs0MyUf7LpFiwVyIvUqMjCQUQ== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc:x-sasl-enc; s= fm1; bh=ws0KqdvFH3XwtXp5R3fFs/7uB8dKBgNgbbf0sLlqWSQ=; b=Cm1lTCNm H1GTV87bZAQA3nZp3CCnKN4VnXkopdVobY8ibGCFtlwuyTI6CMZc9TW7fGR0hlQo 48vAGzWoTQb1uHDaKPouUsTJKzea3Of+z4qfR6leTRUjMrI7cHNS779zV88WI39l DM/nUTEsif5qI+20H+HkG1O7V07271JplmDY3k+mn4xATo5bswzj55y+IEL1x0a0 ZWBNb0bBsXCH+7/cSku3MMat0H6zeEAABGWNc9xISGjXy/AYE9dTWg5TjgSRfBXv C/TTRQXxz4AtTihHG/vbn501sIpvznaG3WZUx7a4xWRDChmASkjxWLB+v/cgTC2h lwNaNSnJHB3lGg== X-ME-Sender: X-Sasl-enc: 2t0e/nKKqHM4CUqp7D3ywBI+yN7ZcfZ9/7N6LNGKtsy4 1499262751 Received: from sjc-alcoop-8814.cisco.com (unknown [128.107.241.163]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 5E07A7E6F1; Wed, 5 Jul 2017 09:52:30 -0400 (EDT) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 9.3 \(3124\)) From: Alissa Cooper In-Reply-To: <4A95BA014132FF49AE685FAB4B9F17F6593D9AA6@SJCEML702-CHM.china.huawei.com> Date: Wed, 5 Jul 2017 09:52:28 -0400 Cc: Peter Saint-Andre - Filament , "gen-art@ietf.org" , "draft-ietf-precis-7613bis@ietf.org" , "precis@ietf.org" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: <4A95BA014132FF49AE685FAB4B9F17F6593D94F9@SJCEML702-CHM.china.huawei.com> <3feb4084-d038-9253-fc48-e739d846102f@filament.com> <4A95BA014132FF49AE685FAB4B9F17F6593D9AA6@SJCEML702-CHM.china.huawei.com> To: Linda Dunbar X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3124) Archived-At: Subject: Re: [precis] [Gen-art] Gen-art last call review of draft-ietf-precis-7613bis-07 X-BeenThere: precis@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: Preparation and Comparison of Internationalized Strings List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 05 Jul 2017 13:52:39 -0000 Linda, thanks for your review. Peter, thanks for addressing Linda=E2=80=99= s comment. I have entered a No Objection ballot position. Alissa > On Jun 27, 2017, at 4:22 PM, Linda Dunbar = wrote: >=20 > Peter,=20 >=20 > Thank you very much for the explanation and the revised wording. Your = new wording is much clearer and help people to understand why to = postpone the checking.=20 >=20 > Thank you.=20 >=20 > Linda Dunbar >=20 > -----Original Message----- > From: Peter Saint-Andre - Filament [mailto:peter@filament.com]=20 > Sent: Monday, June 26, 2017 8:41 PM > To: Peter Saint-Andre - Filament ; Linda Dunbar = ; gen-art@ietf.org > Cc: precis@ietf.org; ietf@ietf.org; draft-ietf-precis-7613bis@ietf.org > Subject: Re: [precis] Gen-art last call review of = draft-ietf-precis-7613bis-07 >=20 > On 6/26/17 5:48 PM, Peter Saint-Andre - Filament wrote: >> Hi Linda, >>=20 >> Thanks for your review. Comments inline. >>=20 >> On 6/26/17 4:53 PM, Linda Dunbar wrote: >>>=20 >>> Reviewer: Linda Dunbar >>> Review result: Ready >>>=20 >>> I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Area=20= >>> Review Team (Gen-ART) reviews all IETF documents being processed by=20= >>> the IESG for the IETF Chair. Please treat these comments just like=20= >>> any other last call comments. >>>=20 >>> For more information, please see the FAQ at >>>=20 >>> . >>>=20 >>> Document: draft-ietf-precis-7613bis >>> Reviewer: Linda Dunbar >>> Review Date: 2017-06-25 >>> IETF LC End Date: 2017-06-27 >>> IESG Telechat date: 2017-07-06 >>>=20 >>> Summary: >>> The document is written very clear. Even for a person who is not=20 >>> familiar with the App area, I can follow through the description. = The=20 >>> document is ready for publication as standard track document Major = issues: >>>=20 >>> One Minor issue: >>>=20 >>> Page 6 last paragraph has: >>> /SASL mechanisms SHOULD delay any case////mapping to the last=20 >>> possible moment, such as when doing a lookup////by username,=20 >>> performing username comparisons, or generating a////cryptographic=20 >>> salt from a username (if the last possible moment////happens on the=20= >>> server, then decisions about case mapping can be a////matter of=20 >>> deployment policy). In keeping with [RFC4422], SASL////mechanisms = are=20 >>> not to apply this or any other profile to////authorization=20 >>> identifiers, only to authentication identifiers./ >>>=20 >>> What does "last possible moment" mean? When I read it, I thought it=20= >>> meant wait until you got all the characters. But the next sentence=20= >>> mentions "..happens on the server". How is the "server" related to=20= >>> the entity that check the user name & password? >>=20 >> Many authentication decisions happen on an application server to = which=20 >> a user-oriented client connects (think of an email client connecting=20= >> to an email server). By "last possible moment" we're referring to=20 >> processing within the application server or an authentication module=20= >> thereof - for instance, instead of performing case mapping on first=20= >> receiving data from the client (thus implying that the case=20 >> information is lost through most of the processing stages), it's=20 >> better to lose that information only at the very end. Do you feel it=20= >> would it help to add a more detailed description of the reasoning = here? >=20 > Here is a proposed adjustment to the text: >=20 > OLD >=20 > SASL mechanisms SHOULD delay any case > mapping to the last possible moment, such as when doing a lookup > by username... >=20 > NEW >=20 > Because case mapping results in > information loss, in order to retain that information for as long > as possible during processing, implementations SHOULD delay any > case mapping to the last possible moment, such as when doing a > lookup by username... >=20 > Peter >=20 > _______________________________________________ > Gen-art mailing list > Gen-art@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art From nobody Wed Jul 5 07:38:13 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: precis@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: precis@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8B3BF131D38; Wed, 5 Jul 2017 07:38:04 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.72 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.72 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=stpeter.im header.b=DK+DpEyO; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.b=UX46T+uy Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id aGYTUvpkXQ8f; Wed, 5 Jul 2017 07:38:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: from out2-smtp.messagingengine.com (out2-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.26]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6A2DF131931; Wed, 5 Jul 2017 07:38:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: from compute2.internal (compute2.nyi.internal [10.202.2.42]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id AFF87208B8; Wed, 5 Jul 2017 10:38:01 -0400 (EDT) Received: from frontend1 ([10.202.2.160]) by compute2.internal (MEProxy); Wed, 05 Jul 2017 10:38:01 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=stpeter.im; h=cc :content-transfer-encoding:content-type:date:from:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:subject:to:x-me-sender :x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc:x-sasl-enc; s=fm1; bh=rDwxL3cgr/gviv3XE4 hGyG2OWSSstVEhXfLY6XctExE=; b=DK+DpEyOEColuxKuoq7TEtHBb3VRwmIdB7 c/jLw3Ldkfx9dRUucoCZB49Ia2RLhpnFCDsVejOLhUUmkNRfL2CAzY1hGq+VkLD8 ZEiI5Gn79iFJcTtnel/CE2s15ThpgEllxiADYROd3+Fx48cL6mNuA1EwcSxqOxv1 ICr1GhG00SX7+KTAat6TM8E0cjCxOmlJ+OefePMqvg/zQRyaQR+a/L2Z4g/r8cqu cnqHxjrnnNLxHzdmVRHvn5U5DF8X8IFoAolzfkeXgGdYRpnrrUINL5w+pQm01VQM j/vZpDEr52E4UfQHI5LCpNMs/Eh6DfnQQaVnWMR2Be+FquzkJTFg== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc:x-sasl-enc; s= fm1; bh=rDwxL3cgr/gviv3XE4hGyG2OWSSstVEhXfLY6XctExE=; b=UX46T+uy e+zjeZtVCq8ziLysW2xKcZ/V+yKwJ2z3KeCZ1L595mkz3xfWNZwBOh8TFCKqg+O1 eNQ65GKLS/iVoLFdHMLGEkg6f4xwabcZ5RQ2z4rdZsCfMjST0Slvg297rbqHEcUR jixyC78gEl9bkYo+iTFAHSyTYamfEgwHOvnXvrN2/n7lryP3cNuN3zjSp0ubVTMI /e37OPDwhFRcCDkPux3+2m4K1ZYlIXhr+oF1MPX/Q1M7q+77KZ8kOPuBzwiz2rUX C3d38Oh+CDRE8Ugs20Mf5NixMEhr+N6kD3OGl19jFXMfMqwlnw/nADV8carE2EHQ 6FV1XHkgPryBIQ== X-ME-Sender: X-Sasl-enc: Qr5PirxUYS/zSpGyN2XiqQMu4fkEACavEhBbaQtpVX50 1499265481 Received: from aither.local (unknown [76.25.4.24]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id F125C7E46B; Wed, 5 Jul 2017 10:38:00 -0400 (EDT) To: Warren Kumari , The IESG References: <149925993234.17545.11533430766237537740.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Cc: draft-ietf-precis-7564bis@ietf.org, precis@ietf.org, precis-chairs@ietf.org From: Peter Saint-Andre Message-ID: <12f3b804-a4cc-5d99-e0d2-24227c88b0a7@stpeter.im> Date: Wed, 5 Jul 2017 08:37:59 -0600 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.12; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <149925993234.17545.11533430766237537740.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Archived-At: Subject: Re: [precis] Warren Kumari's No Objection on draft-ietf-precis-7564bis-08: (with COMMENT) X-BeenThere: precis@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: Preparation and Comparison of Internationalized Strings List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 05 Jul 2017 14:38:05 -0000 On 7/5/17 7:05 AM, Warren Kumari wrote: > Warren Kumari has entered the following ballot position for > draft-ietf-precis-7564bis-08: No Objection > > When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all > email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this > introductory paragraph, however.) > > > Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html > for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. > > > The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-precis-7564bis/ > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > COMMENT: > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Thanks Benoit, the diff was helpful. > > It seems a bit odd to be doing a -bis for a document ~2 years old, and the > draft started <1 year after publication - are we likely to see a -bis of this > newly published doc as soon? It seems better to fix things (and as you can see the diff is relatively small) than to let them fester or expect people to look at errata. And no, we do not expect to be making any changes to this set of documents anytime soon (e.g., 5+ years). Peter From nobody Wed Jul 5 07:44:17 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: precis@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: precis@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 13531131D3A; Wed, 5 Jul 2017 07:44:16 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.72 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.72 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=stpeter.im header.b=XuFB0abh; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.b=aRU10KzL Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id yEU3ozImdYSZ; Wed, 5 Jul 2017 07:44:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from out2-smtp.messagingengine.com (out2-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.26]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 96122131D38; Wed, 5 Jul 2017 07:44:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from compute2.internal (compute2.nyi.internal [10.202.2.42]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id E4CD620913; Wed, 5 Jul 2017 10:44:13 -0400 (EDT) Received: from frontend1 ([10.202.2.160]) by compute2.internal (MEProxy); Wed, 05 Jul 2017 10:44:13 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=stpeter.im; h=cc :content-transfer-encoding:content-type:date:from:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:subject:to:x-me-sender :x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc:x-sasl-enc; s=fm1; bh=G7zuDyIyC30c1AEigN VsxZzHPxrGRdeG/5jzHQoMDfA=; b=XuFB0abhsjvgisHKB3VfWuwV20nnhIrYnf 1tEIwQdUqsbwhEYPng/H+c4UfXr3VH4lLimkBrLDgUY2yBlU6zYM3SLnI1Vi6cNJ 0JQiWXHmlTTDsF8HHjxMq/xSUuLgtsxZxXqrIeGWQrDN/2d+WIBM3cCdBszwCEj1 CCkfiR+PHtLNoWECAotO0FGkcorrJYHLoUlMewY0HwEQre94dPNQ1qwFLB2P/Az2 mPfULFwgPTYg3+tYPEFDZ2fdHS8xMEYc7d6/MMrNJqAQ+rZPuNxv6M3uYdKwFWbq tIDblzYzXrV01IyuR8BtjKFAwACfFVv5aoDvf1mSWxGa6pwcXnzA== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc:x-sasl-enc; s= fm1; bh=G7zuDyIyC30c1AEigNVsxZzHPxrGRdeG/5jzHQoMDfA=; b=aRU10KzL k2EfcbFOpq2HAhCJ+i05EArdaOh0Hl+21csA948E9XtXWf+qy3Ob/38Wtegx+Eer xGMOZQ4yOCHbH26rg1vZuWp7Kh/OPpkX2wSS7MIUlwecoPUm0HOGChohWZCA0aP0 Xi81DDzxvZj0/NnCjQc3UaWOesmmtuIoFBhCc/tzV15wHkKx+h/AneT3+Ksb7Q1N RWu+RIlb9x7ltFHUf7N5VvQGQ8rxcJSwp2pnoureqSiG13vObjhFbAcHzXkQESiL pyiDM94CrFSrjBMjWs6sExUTyfsIMQOyzWFv9zqWpVjBvIKBGBj4xPIzG0p+eyj9 FrB6h9anGhvarQ== X-ME-Sender: X-Sasl-enc: IqzujxqzOCGyRA3IVsgHcpazdM4ScP1DOq4iwvs0dVcB 1499265853 Received: from aither.local (unknown [76.25.4.24]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 25B457E6F1; Wed, 5 Jul 2017 10:44:13 -0400 (EDT) To: Ben Campbell References: <149911881124.22832.7633748744729330805.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <7A34BC2E-57EE-43A9-8A44-AC976BE0BBEA@stpeter.im> <51B82F94-462A-493D-ADB4-06B4198DC37C@stpeter.im> <62C8417C-4640-4518-AB31-C6525125E5FF@nostrum.com> Cc: The IESG , draft-ietf-precis-7564bis@ietf.org, precis@ietf.org, precis-chairs@ietf.org From: Peter Saint-Andre Message-ID: Date: Wed, 5 Jul 2017 08:44:11 -0600 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.12; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <62C8417C-4640-4518-AB31-C6525125E5FF@nostrum.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Archived-At: Subject: Re: [precis] Ben Campbell's Yes on draft-ietf-precis-7564bis-08: (with COMMENT) X-BeenThere: precis@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: Preparation and Comparison of Internationalized Strings List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 05 Jul 2017 14:44:16 -0000 On 7/4/17 11:30 PM, Ben Campbell wrote: > >> On Jul 4, 2017, at 6:28 PM, Peter Saint-Andre >> wrote: >> >> I propose that we leave Section 13.5 as it is and add the >> following paragraph to the end of Section 11.1: >> >> Note: IANA is requested to not make further updates to this >> registry until the issues described in [IAB-Statement] and Section >> 13.5 have been settled. > > How will IANA know when those issues are settled? Should this be an > “until further notice” sort of thing? (Which would lead to the > question of notice from whom). I would say "until further notice", with notice coming from the IESG, likely involving an IETF consensus RFC that updates both PRECIS and IDNA. I'd be curious what John Klensin thinks, given his involvement with IDNA. A pointer to draft-klensin-idna-5892upd-unicode70 might be appropriate as well. Peter From nobody Wed Jul 5 09:50:04 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: precis@ietf.org Delivered-To: precis@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0BBB2131D72; Wed, 5 Jul 2017 09:50:02 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: Warren Kumari To: "The IESG" Cc: draft-ietf-precis-7613bis@ietf.org, Marc Blanchet , precis-chairs@ietf.org, Marc.Blanchet@viagenie.ca, precis@ietf.org X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.55.2 Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Precedence: bulk Message-ID: <149927340203.8318.11635527055471268992.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Wed, 05 Jul 2017 09:50:02 -0700 Archived-At: Subject: [precis] Warren Kumari's No Objection on draft-ietf-precis-7613bis-08: (with COMMENT) X-BeenThere: precis@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 List-Id: Preparation and Comparison of Internationalized Strings List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 05 Jul 2017 16:50:02 -0000 Warren Kumari has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-precis-7613bis-08: No Objection When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this introductory paragraph, however.) Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-precis-7613bis/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- COMMENT: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Taking a page from Benoit's playbook, here is a diff from RFC7613: https://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/rfcdiff.pyht?url1=https://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-ietf-precis-7613bis-08.txt&url2=https://tools.ietf.org/rfc/rfc7613.txt (I feel really stupid for not realizing this earlier, but diff'ing a -bis from the base RFC is a: obvious and b: really useful for understanding which bits need more review) From nobody Wed Jul 5 11:14:53 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: precis@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: precis@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9E814131B5F; Wed, 5 Jul 2017 11:14:51 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.88 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.88 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, T_SPF_HELO_PERMERROR=0.01, T_SPF_PERMERROR=0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ss1HBD721hkZ; Wed, 5 Jul 2017 11:14:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nostrum.com (raven-v6.nostrum.com [IPv6:2001:470:d:1130::1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3A88B131445; Wed, 5 Jul 2017 11:14:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [10.0.1.63] (cpe-66-25-7-22.tx.res.rr.com [66.25.7.22]) (authenticated bits=0) by nostrum.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPSA id v65IEmRh071971 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128 verify=NO); Wed, 5 Jul 2017 13:14:49 -0500 (CDT) (envelope-from ben@nostrum.com) X-Authentication-Warning: raven.nostrum.com: Host cpe-66-25-7-22.tx.res.rr.com [66.25.7.22] claimed to be [10.0.1.63] Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 10.3 \(3273\)) From: Ben Campbell In-Reply-To: <149927340203.8318.11635527055471268992.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Wed, 5 Jul 2017 13:14:49 -0500 Cc: The IESG , precis@ietf.org, draft-ietf-precis-7613bis@ietf.org, precis-chairs@ietf.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: <149927340203.8318.11635527055471268992.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> To: Warren Kumari X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3273) Archived-At: Subject: Re: [precis] Warren Kumari's No Objection on draft-ietf-precis-7613bis-08: (with COMMENT) X-BeenThere: precis@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: Preparation and Comparison of Internationalized Strings List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 05 Jul 2017 18:14:51 -0000 > On Jul 5, 2017, at 11:50 AM, Warren Kumari wrote: >=20 > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > COMMENT: > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >=20 > Taking a page from Benoit's playbook, here is a diff from RFC7613: > = https://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/rfcdiff.pyht?url1=3Dhttps://tools.iet= f.org/id/draft-ietf-precis-7613bis-08.txt&url2=3Dhttps://tools.ietf.org/rf= c/rfc7613.txt > (I feel really stupid for not re > alizing this earlier, but diff'ing a -bis from > the base RFC is a: obvious and b: really useful for understanding = which bits > need more review) Thanks go to the authors for making the -bis easily =E2=80=9Cdiff-able=E2=80= =9D from the RFC. Not everyone does that. I=E2=80=99ve been debating = whether we should consider some guidance to -bis authors to avoid = unnecessary changes that make it difficult to review the changes. (e.g. = stylistic changes, unnecessary reorganization, etc.) From nobody Wed Jul 5 12:34:38 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: precis@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: precis@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id ADF0213154F for ; Wed, 5 Jul 2017 12:34:33 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kumari-net.20150623.gappssmtp.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Eq9XjLWeEl2n for ; Wed, 5 Jul 2017 12:34:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-vk0-x22d.google.com (mail-vk0-x22d.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400c:c05::22d]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 570D6131701 for ; Wed, 5 Jul 2017 12:34:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-vk0-x22d.google.com with SMTP id r125so131378511vkf.1 for ; Wed, 05 Jul 2017 12:34:29 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kumari-net.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=4TdjZjJJPr9dx/iZbkFB5bKY57yPY3O33v22O9QS0vg=; b=sZuh+RV/WY5/pLJTe3tRF8idGQ4FUJC3kwA6v9Xsk6EBmvnvZZSxKHnSaCn6lxP3XZ NOnsMtsPjdrC9Y4hKXb4XKmxjwUWLGq5wghl0ijxPbJSCOfkUYwZcTlkKOhoxihWJevL o4rZBu5SS+70B5JFHmuMlcKgc302K8NK9MC4bwMRgl50G+CsS65GcAtA1hLDVZGZw+rD wfvmqi27F9hjUS7tNWInszPBUM3e3TDhOe7Lr1PTWVZZDqh24hTuYDAFBHktbnbNjKPX XoTfh0BBqTZk0t9eDOy43ayrRHUiOE9pkjlhjIxDbdLFY79aSWbJe0yqBSke1fbR5aRC V/zQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=4TdjZjJJPr9dx/iZbkFB5bKY57yPY3O33v22O9QS0vg=; b=QMzeuQTcRUxE3Zrl0MtkUd/QS0DHc6u39jGqFPGvnSqMS9P7siAUN24skPrBdrBAv/ fjllBuqJH3Yy8E+P5H3FgmfTHXdolL794DWdibmkkdIuqwnqcu8uSNVzH9UVEKpH0p9D SlIOhEF3MVX7Jf8UZtzYseGnOVY/DuPqaJWlDCYmt0iN/W7jTE21eZdwUjvTxsbqYeOh q4DEc9JWEAsXcZk630CNtCKWkoPg3qgmBZiRceZsrX05VmiAIK3TVYYjqOkwMyCYUNxL f+cOQdp5BjiMjuKBEkCyU0pfvcAdaeoY8qWunnVrpB351Bd1cnZ94S26RNyZbB7X0DEs KTHA== X-Gm-Message-State: AKS2vOxaTlgNURfQ96FBunAKNGgPeEJuQ3+dFtulM06b8ZE7lnI5Fb8e 8PPBEBnskM9+NLQ0exg3lLNtawtP5Aca X-Received: by 10.31.3.17 with SMTP id 17mr27049407vkd.51.1499283268298; Wed, 05 Jul 2017 12:34:28 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.159.39.165 with HTTP; Wed, 5 Jul 2017 12:33:47 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <149927340203.8318.11635527055471268992.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> From: Warren Kumari Date: Wed, 5 Jul 2017 15:33:47 -0400 Message-ID: To: Ben Campbell Cc: The IESG , precis@ietf.org, draft-ietf-precis-7613bis@ietf.org, precis-chairs@ietf.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Archived-At: Subject: Re: [precis] Warren Kumari's No Objection on draft-ietf-precis-7613bis-08: (with COMMENT) X-BeenThere: precis@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: Preparation and Comparison of Internationalized Strings List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 05 Jul 2017 19:34:34 -0000 On Wed, Jul 5, 2017 at 2:14 PM, Ben Campbell wrote: > >> On Jul 5, 2017, at 11:50 AM, Warren Kumari wrote: >> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >> COMMENT: >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >> >> Taking a page from Benoit's playbook, here is a diff from RFC7613: >> https://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/rfcdiff.pyht?url1=3Dhttps://tools.i= etf.org/id/draft-ietf-precis-7613bis-08.txt&url2=3Dhttps://tools.ietf.org/r= fc/rfc7613.txt >> (I feel really stupid for not re >> alizing this earlier, but diff'ing a -bis from >> the base RFC is a: obvious and b: really useful for understanding which = bits >> need more review) > > Thanks go to the authors for making the -bis easily =E2=80=9Cdiff-able=E2= =80=9D from the RFC. Indeed. I intended to thank them as well, but forgot. > Not everyone does that. I=E2=80=99ve been debating whether we should cons= ider some guidance to -bis authors to avoid unnecessary changes that make i= t difficult to review the changes. (e.g. stylistic changes, unnecessary reo= rganization, etc.) > That would be helpful, and is non-obvious to many authors. Many people seem to feel that they should make gratuitous changes to show that they "did stuff". W --=20 I don't think the execution is relevant when it was obviously a bad idea in the first place. This is like putting rabid weasels in your pants, and later expressing regret at having chosen those particular rabid weasels and that pair of pants. ---maf From nobody Wed Jul 5 13:05:15 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: precis@ietf.org Delivered-To: precis@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8874F1319E8; Wed, 5 Jul 2017 13:05:13 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: Eric Rescorla To: "The IESG" Cc: draft-ietf-precis-7613bis@ietf.org, Marc Blanchet , precis-chairs@ietf.org, Marc.Blanchet@viagenie.ca, precis@ietf.org X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.55.2 Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Precedence: bulk Message-ID: <149928511354.13530.16384868318840634986.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Wed, 05 Jul 2017 13:05:13 -0700 Archived-At: Subject: [precis] Eric Rescorla's No Objection on draft-ietf-precis-7613bis-08: (with COMMENT) X-BeenThere: precis@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 List-Id: Preparation and Comparison of Internationalized Strings List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 05 Jul 2017 20:05:13 -0000 Eric Rescorla has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-precis-7613bis-08: No Objection When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this introductory paragraph, however.) Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-precis-7613bis/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- COMMENT: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- I agree with jsalowey's point about discouraging raw password comparison. Can you do something about that? The use of "false positive" is confusing because positive can either mean "accept" or "reject". I would use "false accept" or "false reject" or some other clearer term From nobody Wed Jul 5 13:17:30 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: precis@ietf.org Delivered-To: precis@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 04A3C131A1A; Wed, 5 Jul 2017 13:17:29 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: Eric Rescorla To: "The IESG" Cc: draft-ietf-precis-7564bis@ietf.org, Marc Blanchet , precis-chairs@ietf.org, Marc.Blanchet@viagenie.ca, precis@ietf.org X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.55.2 Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Precedence: bulk Message-ID: <149928584901.19925.8246271341938785575.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Wed, 05 Jul 2017 13:17:29 -0700 Archived-At: Subject: [precis] Eric Rescorla's No Objection on draft-ietf-precis-7564bis-08: (with COMMENT) X-BeenThere: precis@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 List-Id: Preparation and Comparison of Internationalized Strings List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 05 Jul 2017 20:17:29 -0000 Eric Rescorla has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-precis-7564bis-08: No Objection When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this introductory paragraph, however.) Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-precis-7564bis/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- COMMENT: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- A table comparing Identifier and Freeform code point rules would not go unappreciated From nobody Wed Jul 5 14:41:22 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: precis@ietf.org Delivered-To: precis@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A4E3D1200C1; Wed, 5 Jul 2017 14:41:20 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: Adam Roach To: "The IESG" Cc: draft-ietf-precis-7564bis@ietf.org, Marc Blanchet , precis-chairs@ietf.org, Marc.Blanchet@viagenie.ca, precis@ietf.org X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.55.2 Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Precedence: bulk Message-ID: <149929088066.19029.17184582029308905319.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Wed, 05 Jul 2017 14:41:20 -0700 Archived-At: Subject: [precis] Adam Roach's Discuss on draft-ietf-precis-7564bis-08: (with DISCUSS) X-BeenThere: precis@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 List-Id: Preparation and Comparison of Internationalized Strings List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 05 Jul 2017 21:41:21 -0000 Adam Roach has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-precis-7564bis-08: Discuss When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this introductory paragraph, however.) Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-precis-7564bis/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- DISCUSS: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Section 12.5 contains the following normative statement: > Furthermore, because most languages are typically > represented by a single script or a small set of scripts, and > because most scripts are typically contained in one or more > blocks of code points, the software SHOULD warn the user when > presenting a string that mixes code points from more than one > script or block, or that uses code points outside the normal > range of the user's preferred language(s). This guidance seems broadly unimplementable for any users whose native language uses a non-Latin script. Due in large part to the Internet's ASCII heritage, and combined with the somewhat ubiquitous use of Latin characters for other worldwide purposes (e.g., a quick perusal of Russian- and Chinese-language web sites shows numerous examples of Latin representations for things like stock ticker symbols and metric abbreviations), it seems that the normative requirement to warn when "presenting a string that... uses code points outside the normal range of the user's preferred language(s)" will *either* warn non-Latin-character users almost constantly (if Latin is considered outside the range), or be broadly useless in preventing spoofing (if it is). I'm not clever enough to come up with a generalized solution for users of all alphabets, so don't have a generic proposal here; but I think that the guidance does at least need to be properly scoped so that it bears only on warning Latin alphabet users of the presence of non-Latin characters, while acknowledging that it is probably rather useless when used in the opposite direction. I imagine that it still makes sense to warn non-Latin users of non-Latin characters outside the codepoints used by their language (e.g., warning Greek speakers of the presence of Cyrillic characters). From nobody Wed Jul 5 15:13:06 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: precis@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: precis@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 87D23127241; Wed, 5 Jul 2017 15:12:59 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.72 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.72 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=stpeter.im header.b=jC6E5wLO; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.b=GhW8i+mB Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id AI-benQdztbr; Wed, 5 Jul 2017 15:12:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: from out2-smtp.messagingengine.com (out2-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.26]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 68A1C127201; Wed, 5 Jul 2017 15:12:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: from compute2.internal (compute2.nyi.internal [10.202.2.42]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id ACE8B2091B; Wed, 5 Jul 2017 18:12:56 -0400 (EDT) Received: from frontend2 ([10.202.2.161]) by compute2.internal (MEProxy); Wed, 05 Jul 2017 18:12:56 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=stpeter.im; h=cc :content-transfer-encoding:content-type:date:from:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:subject:to:x-me-sender :x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc:x-sasl-enc; s=fm1; bh=LzC1BJVUaX/8vngJyw 8nkAMq4fGLO0Dvvhn+n3xGNGE=; b=jC6E5wLO3YjjsgU+dgWFVqCaXw64dyQ1mF yFoHvlPraNNtEhWEH416K+dJD/ZtUnnFOAj7TNoU8Li7iTXnSVTfEoh/igmgaE1E ZpMZP7aoHAZRhKKw+wm2XO4l4/lveP7VFIDY1MywWp4SkqBg+B9GSrRHpL1dnNJS vS5f/LKk3a2alDPY4O+7UQECjrqN/QPFvCuEXZ502Of16KPeuAApNTwd8WmQYNch ou8Afz+z8WGt0ruLAtDrLJgBIqbmuWBnZRDbJHhgoy/0O5dD0RbRVJv97sESHMhY mTo8aS3kiLavR+6wuyfsadlOYYTHBN6wS8ehuW1HvcFfkyUlU1+Q== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc:x-sasl-enc; s= fm1; bh=LzC1BJVUaX/8vngJyw8nkAMq4fGLO0Dvvhn+n3xGNGE=; b=GhW8i+mB euhLcMjFoqXxLtfE7wnJSvSwBGLflTVzuG4R9UjKL4w5QumQqFrGQoHeD9ONlUVH jIV6NJ89z7kFq/yf3z5DrvDU0kgfsXxHFXhFxdvf9KegHXV7p7mqNFve53E8u2BG pQmMnp46dYi1Xngn0fOWxcFQ+2BA+KNolu2zf+aaGARyYzQ3fwBGsaTbPuxuUF4A IfxkoSCokmOvKIl82fZZeqyTLXrYWyD+h22YAuBn8HO4FgWxc9lqLMfTA+ysuZfT FmIQpWIFnYdULGcEwUY6qDpxJ4cqGNetFP3/I6ttd7mxv+bInq/VRnBo5M+CMP6X RSuuD/vBvbH6Yw== X-ME-Sender: X-Sasl-enc: Y1zIXHDdk05qZyNENFQzy8tZEvXnD/LIGTNhT26SR0HD 1499292776 Received: from aither.local (unknown [76.25.4.24]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id DA3E02479F; Wed, 5 Jul 2017 18:12:55 -0400 (EDT) To: Eric Rescorla , The IESG References: <149928511354.13530.16384868318840634986.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Cc: precis@ietf.org, draft-ietf-precis-7613bis@ietf.org, precis-chairs@ietf.org From: Peter Saint-Andre Message-ID: <030c786e-3697-08f9-2a27-75cf5e90cc68@stpeter.im> Date: Wed, 5 Jul 2017 16:12:54 -0600 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.12; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <149928511354.13530.16384868318840634986.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Archived-At: Subject: Re: [precis] Eric Rescorla's No Objection on draft-ietf-precis-7613bis-08: (with COMMENT) X-BeenThere: precis@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: Preparation and Comparison of Internationalized Strings List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 05 Jul 2017 22:12:59 -0000 On 7/5/17 2:05 PM, Eric Rescorla wrote: > Eric Rescorla has entered the following ballot position for > draft-ietf-precis-7613bis-08: No Objection > > When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all > email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this > introductory paragraph, however.) > > > Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html > for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. > > > The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-precis-7613bis/ > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > COMMENT: > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > I agree with jsalowey's point about discouraging raw password comparison. Can > you do something about that? In version -08 we added the following text: 8.2. Password/Passphrase Comparison In systems that conform to modern best practices for security, verification of passwords during authentication will not use the comparison defined in Section 4.2.3. Instead, because the system performs cryptographic calculations to verify the password, it will prepare the password as defined in Section 4.2.1 and enforce the rules as defined in Section 4.2.2 before performing the relevant calculations. > The use of "false positive" is confusing because positive can either mean > "accept" or "reject". I would use "false accept" or "false reject" or some > other clearer term That's a good suggestion - we'll incorporate that change in the post-IESG revision. Peter From nobody Wed Jul 5 15:13:32 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: precis@ietf.org Delivered-To: precis@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DF5B0127201; Wed, 5 Jul 2017 15:13:27 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: Adam Roach To: "The IESG" Cc: draft-ietf-precis-7700bis@ietf.org, Marc Blanchet , precis-chairs@ietf.org, Marc.Blanchet@viagenie.ca, precis@ietf.org X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.55.2 Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Precedence: bulk Message-ID: <149929280791.22663.592778419584772415.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Wed, 05 Jul 2017 15:13:27 -0700 Archived-At: Subject: [precis] Adam Roach's Yes on draft-ietf-precis-7700bis-08: (with COMMENT) X-BeenThere: precis@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 List-Id: Preparation and Comparison of Internationalized Strings List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 05 Jul 2017 22:13:28 -0000 Adam Roach has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-precis-7700bis-08: Yes When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this introductory paragraph, however.) Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-precis-7700bis/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- COMMENT: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- I like the clear explanation of some of the design choices in here (e.g., the rationale for using NFKC). There are two places that I think a slight bit of additional text might be useful: 1. When talking about processing "each string" in section 2.4, it's probably worth noting that implementations should be careful not to assume that any information received from a wire protocol has necessarily had any of the rules in this document applied to it (as this might allow intentionally noncompliant clients to slip certain kinds of shenanigans past their checks); and 2. Where the final paragraph of section 4 indicates that the operations in this document are not necessarily idempotent, it is probably worth being more explicit that they should be applied repeatedly until the output string is stable; or, if the string does not stabilize after a reasonable number of iterations (is this possible?), that it should be rejected as invalid. From nobody Wed Jul 5 15:14:41 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: precis@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: precis@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 94047131BB6 for ; Wed, 5 Jul 2017 15:14:39 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.598 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.598 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=rtfm-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id r0XruwC0Zw7H for ; Wed, 5 Jul 2017 15:14:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-yw0-x231.google.com (mail-yw0-x231.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4002:c05::231]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 81DF11317A7 for ; Wed, 5 Jul 2017 15:14:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-yw0-x231.google.com with SMTP id l21so1010004ywb.1 for ; Wed, 05 Jul 2017 15:14:36 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=rtfm-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=g6Cv6MU2p4xL268395UCi7QxEPZy5RHBCYlxL66drD4=; b=D2JiyXpopmFSf3OmCmDFGBhIgjwaMsoYbAlRRNOzsKz/aXTQAiGMtxQuyAe9UNqmwn tXRgPRx666r26AlkGCS1n4eUBs628yFbniMNmRFkITxqVSrIg92O6+913m1v8Kd9zBX7 cVR2gLFxUFfDay9bT6DqAakzinRFjLwbvSnUH3GDOkip//gR3egPJNs5umw4ZhtCrTnC Nmg3DjRNo3m0/2Lgm4SS/mcyxRJ79ancf5fLnIdW3nQV4NgzBhLiGjGO7S6XHKjwFW9k HNDicspwqw3R0h6742lgZ3ASW5YfOPAEHxhbWq2nKgceH7myVYzZnqlLsdxzc4tvxKEh USVg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=g6Cv6MU2p4xL268395UCi7QxEPZy5RHBCYlxL66drD4=; b=t0KHXT7zPiYywmU+SnqiW2t+KXBGX2YgkQhOABMpVdhBzyXpZ1nN469Pd8axIoMyF9 Ut8H6aCdBaiJk1XUtkEYKkXxQW9WkHVRP8KBmP4TTaPcaSE09IM9uV/OiJnRToDYcSue +me4aVqfX0ThImH827MHhEnqZPEkL5DELCkpulG58NtPt/uuQwuH+OTvA4FbaK9lmpcQ c6EEpFyy6WPUFdxVH4HPSceesCJHd6ooNhdQftJPP0Jv2HdqVO2gzSLmR7T6BAN/LRSA tgoTv26EB9rG3a4x94k028OPaduBEnbARrTJB+79bzkZJRHSbMsJQQ5rBXJzBfUU2R00 lagA== X-Gm-Message-State: AIVw113zXH9kFVGBTU8qkJ13VAxKG34ujTjTPOt6PHrupv6zejJsXqb/ Xzj8zFGhVCzsRF+XDLzWqQ5psMnlBo7Cjl4= X-Received: by 10.129.118.66 with SMTP id j2mr19028921ywk.85.1499292875740; Wed, 05 Jul 2017 15:14:35 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.13.215.9 with HTTP; Wed, 5 Jul 2017 15:13:55 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <030c786e-3697-08f9-2a27-75cf5e90cc68@stpeter.im> References: <149928511354.13530.16384868318840634986.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <030c786e-3697-08f9-2a27-75cf5e90cc68@stpeter.im> From: Eric Rescorla Date: Wed, 5 Jul 2017 15:13:55 -0700 Message-ID: To: Peter Saint-Andre Cc: The IESG , precis@ietf.org, draft-ietf-precis-7613bis@ietf.org, precis-chairs@ietf.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="f403045eed8a461c1805539953e3" Archived-At: Subject: Re: [precis] Eric Rescorla's No Objection on draft-ietf-precis-7613bis-08: (with COMMENT) X-BeenThere: precis@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: Preparation and Comparison of Internationalized Strings List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 05 Jul 2017 22:14:39 -0000 --f403045eed8a461c1805539953e3 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" On Wed, Jul 5, 2017 at 3:12 PM, Peter Saint-Andre wrote: > On 7/5/17 2:05 PM, Eric Rescorla wrote: > > Eric Rescorla has entered the following ballot position for > > draft-ietf-precis-7613bis-08: No Objection > > > > When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all > > email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this > > introductory paragraph, however.) > > > > > > Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria. > html > > for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. > > > > > > The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: > > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-precis-7613bis/ > > > > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > COMMENT: > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > I agree with jsalowey's point about discouraging raw password > comparison. Can > > you do something about that? > > In version -08 we added the following text: > > 8.2. Password/Passphrase Comparison > > In systems that conform to modern best practices for security, > verification of passwords during authentication will not use the > comparison defined in Section 4.2.3. Instead, because the system > performs cryptographic calculations to verify the password, it will > prepare the password as defined in Section 4.2.1 and enforce the > rules as defined in Section 4.2.2 before performing the relevant > calculations. > OK, I can live with this. -Ekr > > > The use of "false positive" is confusing because positive can either mean > > "accept" or "reject". I would use "false accept" or "false reject" or > some > > other clearer term > > That's a good suggestion - we'll incorporate that change in the > post-IESG revision. > > Peter > > > --f403045eed8a461c1805539953e3 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable


On Wed, Jul 5, 2017 at 3:12 PM, Peter Saint-Andre <= ;stpeter@stpeter.im= > wrote:
O= n 7/5/17 2:05 PM, Eric Rescorla wrote:
> Eric Rescorla has entered the following ballot position for
> draft-ietf-precis-7613bis-08: No Objection
>
> When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all<= br> > email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut thi= s
> introductory paragraph, however.)
>
>
> Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/i= esg/statement/discuss-criteria.html
> for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.
>
>
> The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: > https://datatracker.ietf.org/do= c/draft-ietf-precis-7613bis/
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------= ----------
> COMMENT:
> ------------------------------------------------------------= ----------
>
> I agree with jsalowey's point about discouraging raw password comp= arison. Can
> you do something about that?

In version -08 we added the following text:

8.2.=C2=A0 Password/Passphrase Comparison

=C2=A0 =C2=A0In systems that conform to modern best practices for security,=
=C2=A0 =C2=A0verification of passwords during authentication will not use t= he
=C2=A0 =C2=A0comparison defined in Section 4.2.3.=C2=A0 Instead, because th= e system
=C2=A0 =C2=A0performs cryptographic calculations to verify the password, it= will
=C2=A0 =C2=A0prepare the password as defined in Section 4.2.1 and enforce t= he
=C2=A0 =C2=A0rules as defined in Section 4.2.2 before performing the releva= nt
=C2=A0 =C2=A0calculations.

OK, I can li= ve with this.

-Ekr
=C2=A0

> The use of "false positive" is confusing because positive ca= n either mean
> "accept" or "reject". I would use "false acce= pt" or "false reject" or some
> other clearer term

That's a good suggestion - we'll incorporate that change in = the
post-IESG revision.

Peter



--f403045eed8a461c1805539953e3-- From nobody Wed Jul 5 15:41:25 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: precis@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: precis@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0911E126B72; Wed, 5 Jul 2017 15:41:24 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.72 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.72 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=stpeter.im header.b=O5EyioZ3; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.b=K8oihZfZ Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id igwbPYiyl1Ev; Wed, 5 Jul 2017 15:41:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from out2-smtp.messagingengine.com (out2-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.26]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 04790127201; Wed, 5 Jul 2017 15:41:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from compute2.internal (compute2.nyi.internal [10.202.2.42]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 680372072C; Wed, 5 Jul 2017 18:41:21 -0400 (EDT) Received: from frontend2 ([10.202.2.161]) by compute2.internal (MEProxy); Wed, 05 Jul 2017 18:41:21 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=stpeter.im; h=cc :content-transfer-encoding:content-type:date:from:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:subject:to:x-me-sender :x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc:x-sasl-enc; s=fm1; bh=Oju/DLdQFvq2E20BYn MTtSL9xynFu0h5GG6rJ9LTF04=; b=O5EyioZ3q0nca+/fcp9nase/wV0sehrNg5 Pvgwf8JrxzjJaWbUPMnsXcHRDX+udqNUzyqDE0atMFRCQd9z9PShGsN1m8JAotjH PvbsSMGiNgfkEErGA6ZZYE7/w7G+GjMKrp9hWDkw1E6FnpS2zEKTlHjew/uheKtA CjC86iXr5Y4tMhA7nxBVcuEtHZBwDgPisOMp5ZkV6EL+hckpwY8CI7CKm5aGwts9 6P+G1NZXx8baH9Tc3aNtZUZH9mIF0zU1H5pPI3qzWSOK2mKtfjnA4uZ+FKZXMAhQ UcAhBlMw0f4tPSC5i1ydVg7fg40BR8gJo3AZvNiXBexjYnYchpsg== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc:x-sasl-enc; s= fm1; bh=Oju/DLdQFvq2E20BYnMTtSL9xynFu0h5GG6rJ9LTF04=; b=K8oihZfZ uVISaXOrMPYSQiTfFppjfJgP+T09hqLYQAfgng74seK5jFdmCvPosej+MlAB7qR/ pV1DnUqVUx4I3gFzC2lccduqnIV5GE43803oYtfHiex4j1LiQIkwb3/w4scJQznQ 9VdhkYFv75KA42qHKmILi7sFZQ9T4XVIvRXxJn5I4/Pj94VHYe7DV+zEitYz2lyV wjIFEY5IMOjJyWBQGKFlSpSvxsnmLW1BIYOd8iW16OVLwljCj7xY2QQH5NaEVFY8 KYMp5smxLrb7e5MQ2OVGVDdZpJCZzbvTXQe+edj1x/YGx7NNsPvaH3n6BBkAU/m3 a9mxSJdB32zqTw== X-ME-Sender: X-Sasl-enc: N09Tz+pdw0e9aZH5rIl5WWtzg2Ny8pQPJO9JsXGY2h7y 1499294481 Received: from aither.local (unknown [76.25.4.24]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id B1F06240AF; Wed, 5 Jul 2017 18:41:20 -0400 (EDT) To: Adam Roach , The IESG References: <149929280791.22663.592778419584772415.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Cc: draft-ietf-precis-7700bis@ietf.org, precis@ietf.org, precis-chairs@ietf.org From: Peter Saint-Andre Message-ID: <1ad40fa7-6696-7fab-b753-c4913ca445e3@stpeter.im> Date: Wed, 5 Jul 2017 16:41:19 -0600 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.12; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <149929280791.22663.592778419584772415.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Archived-At: Subject: Re: [precis] Adam Roach's Yes on draft-ietf-precis-7700bis-08: (with COMMENT) X-BeenThere: precis@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: Preparation and Comparison of Internationalized Strings List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 05 Jul 2017 22:41:24 -0000 On 7/5/17 4:13 PM, Adam Roach wrote: > Adam Roach has entered the following ballot position for > draft-ietf-precis-7700bis-08: Yes > > When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all > email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this > introductory paragraph, however.) > > > Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html > for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. > > > The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-precis-7700bis/ > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > COMMENT: > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > I like the clear explanation of some of the design choices in here (e.g., the > rationale for using NFKC). > > There are two places that I think a slight bit of additional text might be > useful: > > 1. When talking about processing "each string" in section 2.4, it's probably > worth noting that implementations should be careful not to assume that any > information received from a wire protocol has necessarily had any of the rules > in this document applied to it (as this might allow intentionally noncompliant > clients to slip certain kinds of shenanigans past their checks); and draft-ietf-precis-7564bis contains the following sentence: When an application applies a profile of a PRECIS string class, it transforms an input string (which might or might not be conforming) into an output string that definitively conforms to the profile. It strikes me that something similar would be useful here, especially the concepts of "input string" and "output string". > 2. Where the final paragraph of section 4 indicates that the operations in this > document are not necessarily idempotent, it is probably worth being more > explicit that they should be applied repeatedly until the output string is > stable; or, if the string does not stabilize after a reasonable number of > iterations (is this possible?), that it should be rejected as invalid. Thanks for the suggestion; although we might think that's implicit in the notion of non-idempotence, it's much better to make the ramifications and handling explicit. I'll add this text in the post-IESG version. Peter From nobody Wed Jul 5 15:58:22 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: precis@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: precis@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0C1A5131566; Wed, 5 Jul 2017 15:58:16 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.72 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.72 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=stpeter.im header.b=QAj2qNMH; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.b=EAnj806u Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id nF-4ecPPWy4W; Wed, 5 Jul 2017 15:58:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: from out2-smtp.messagingengine.com (out2-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.26]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4440812ECCB; Wed, 5 Jul 2017 15:58:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: from compute2.internal (compute2.nyi.internal [10.202.2.42]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id B16A220AB2; Wed, 5 Jul 2017 18:58:10 -0400 (EDT) Received: from frontend2 ([10.202.2.161]) by compute2.internal (MEProxy); Wed, 05 Jul 2017 18:58:10 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=stpeter.im; h=cc :content-transfer-encoding:content-type:date:from:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:subject:to:x-me-sender :x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc:x-sasl-enc; s=fm1; bh=OypLzqQCsLAtvUxP4a 65LzZQb2dNzYnAfOhwZQrG4NI=; b=QAj2qNMH7jR2gd0VeC4HjL/XCPMRUIPIOb 0KER3UqbFmp13oaKxUK9CBbvG9AsUUEltxETjTJonqXhneNJ2/fhqd7lVZklzHDp N+vw71R6M25KlfnhOdF240Ef7wdVVBUDI4+Yi4ypG2MLDQjORiWupZd25C17S8oq QabatoNpLDai2VedhYWQ48s8yCHtVX4WA1kjZY6j7GZ+TocdygFkcCyd+7uAW4l7 wH7UCGEadnl7Yi+szy9jF1BGvCK6Y3yK0pkIZ7uLtfgEnKnIoiyuMd/0h0ZjG1IS rVKk94hcVPbf3Ip14ExgBF+ijn93ARdQptbuKkszt9Wwa0mp1gOQ== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc:x-sasl-enc; s= fm1; bh=OypLzqQCsLAtvUxP4a65LzZQb2dNzYnAfOhwZQrG4NI=; b=EAnj806u unbGHVQ/3EQoQbOjSl3KbTOej+Hsr7ivrVm2F4AeyEK9xhZPrElF9cSlex6Q7sY0 xN4CAdo3tR0NpqdWIkt+evwb7tUjclFBki+AvL9TgASXVCt6m7syz7SnF4BCjnIp HOEbhZPzmao82I1uQo67PpmEnDkTtDvIp4hPNvMEmmzcmMo0avybvSp1g53UXdIA 7ciaq3O8RGLV4BQ/XxNXCKE4R+x6iZtJOHQcscWF4h/riRGIvR2mgzE5d3qAZU3U kqFLXufTap1oFcg8i9Yl9zLL+rBNuWIJH2bikpU01FjzHbq4R2VDGh2dcOnbbLx7 u0aRHAJKpd4k/w== X-ME-Sender: X-Sasl-enc: WkkeJBqrRvMkoLUuXkn5kHYlsee9BXjhvykEqMfbQNYF 1499295490 Received: from aither.local (unknown [76.25.4.24]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 016C82479F; Wed, 5 Jul 2017 18:58:09 -0400 (EDT) To: Adam Roach , The IESG References: <149929088066.19029.17184582029308905319.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Cc: draft-ietf-precis-7564bis@ietf.org, precis@ietf.org, precis-chairs@ietf.org From: Peter Saint-Andre Message-ID: Date: Wed, 5 Jul 2017 16:58:09 -0600 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.12; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <149929088066.19029.17184582029308905319.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Archived-At: Subject: Re: [precis] Adam Roach's Discuss on draft-ietf-precis-7564bis-08: (with DISCUSS) X-BeenThere: precis@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: Preparation and Comparison of Internationalized Strings List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 05 Jul 2017 22:58:16 -0000 On 7/5/17 3:41 PM, Adam Roach wrote: > Adam Roach has entered the following ballot position for > draft-ietf-precis-7564bis-08: Discuss > > When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all > email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this > introductory paragraph, however.) > > > Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html > for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. > > > The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-precis-7564bis/ > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > DISCUSS: > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Section 12.5 contains the following normative statement: > >> Furthermore, because most languages are typically >> represented by a single script or a small set of scripts, and >> because most scripts are typically contained in one or more >> blocks of code points, the software SHOULD warn the user when >> presenting a string that mixes code points from more than one >> script or block, or that uses code points outside the normal >> range of the user's preferred language(s). > > This guidance seems broadly unimplementable for any users whose native language > uses a non-Latin script. Due in large part to the Internet's ASCII heritage, > and combined with the somewhat ubiquitous use of Latin characters for other > worldwide purposes (e.g., a quick perusal of Russian- and Chinese-language web > sites shows numerous examples of Latin representations for things like stock > ticker symbols and metric abbreviations), it seems that the normative > requirement to warn when "presenting a string that... uses code points outside > the normal range of the user's preferred language(s)" will *either* warn > non-Latin-character users almost constantly (if Latin is considered outside the > range), or be broadly useless in preventing spoofing (if it is). > > I'm not clever enough to come up with a generalized solution for users of all > alphabets, so don't have a generic proposal here; but I think that the guidance > does at least need to be properly scoped so that it bears only on warning Latin > alphabet users of the presence of non-Latin characters, while acknowledging > that it is probably rather useless when used in the opposite direction. I > imagine that it still makes sense to warn non-Latin users of non-Latin > characters outside the codepoints used by their language (e.g., warning Greek > speakers of the presence of Cyrillic characters). Good catch. Yes, we could add a carve-out for characters from the ASCII repertoire when the context is Internet applications that use such characters. (It's not *necessarily* the case that all applications using PRECIS are Internet applications or involve ASCII characters - e.g., perhaps an application deployed on a closed intranet within, say, the Chinese government could still use the PRECIS rules to handle input and output strings, without any ASCII characters ever shown to end users.) Peter From nobody Wed Jul 5 15:59:07 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: precis@ietf.org Delivered-To: precis@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 90B6012EC4A; Wed, 5 Jul 2017 15:58:59 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: Adam Roach To: "The IESG" Cc: draft-ietf-precis-7613bis@ietf.org, Marc Blanchet , precis-chairs@ietf.org, Marc.Blanchet@viagenie.ca, precis@ietf.org X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.55.2 Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Precedence: bulk Message-ID: <149929553958.22745.14506621491893778091.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Wed, 05 Jul 2017 15:58:59 -0700 Archived-At: Subject: [precis] Adam Roach's Yes on draft-ietf-precis-7613bis-08: (with COMMENT) X-BeenThere: precis@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 List-Id: Preparation and Comparison of Internationalized Strings List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 05 Jul 2017 22:59:00 -0000 Adam Roach has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-precis-7613bis-08: Yes When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this introductory paragraph, however.) Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-precis-7613bis/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- COMMENT: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Nit: The final paragraph of section 1 is missing a paren after "[RFC7622]". Nit: Step 2 in section 4.2.2 cites RFC 4013 as text rather than the normal citation format of [RFC4013] I have the same comment as I did on rfc7700bis regarding the implications of operation idempotence. From nobody Wed Jul 5 17:32:07 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: precis@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: precis@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6FFCB129562; Wed, 5 Jul 2017 17:32:01 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.721 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.721 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=stpeter.im header.b=FfoC8u+J; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.b=Y3Lmbdrf Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id A7h799beDXsn; Wed, 5 Jul 2017 17:31:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from out2-smtp.messagingengine.com (out2-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.26]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DA7801292F5; Wed, 5 Jul 2017 17:31:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from compute2.internal (compute2.nyi.internal [10.202.2.42]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id F2C66209BC; Wed, 5 Jul 2017 20:31:58 -0400 (EDT) Received: from frontend1 ([10.202.2.160]) by compute2.internal (MEProxy); Wed, 05 Jul 2017 20:31:58 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=stpeter.im; h=cc :content-transfer-encoding:content-type:date:from:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:subject:to:x-me-sender :x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc:x-sasl-enc; s=fm1; bh=1uv7RN9EeHqmLR+isD oxwFWxnjwPo2BbVWn78ohINHA=; b=FfoC8u+JADpeWxJX8vWz1GK6dnsiJEdJoT 1uf1CEdnIFtAFqHYGlW9UGF0Q/onXyH0Uie5FRQnrzFG8qNgpqEhEg8wtaatEdC1 PHPTooFSBcntLAzEIQd2gbIaCEPcXpdUMERd8pQ2YhQizCYGLTzTsH6PQJMJLKTr zehIIlRizJORpPw/3DWHMaOIdmNGd2n6TnSwX2Z+iYElKdQtZmi+rDzuPWPe0bmk 3vlE6zV7e9kpKcy3ELCyBTpB2qTt1Z2wNdTv2rDckSMeqP4BH3LIEum3OE3WgHtY 437BtuS3VCt+pJUR6+3i/VRinEpjgkq+Yr/53zW00TVUpDcTL9Pg== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc:x-sasl-enc; s= fm1; bh=1uv7RN9EeHqmLR+isDoxwFWxnjwPo2BbVWn78ohINHA=; b=Y3Lmbdrf h1hyu/bhPEkHzIqhHBpIufKr4DR+/3dQbxH9qcJY+e9NbFVq+ZPtlwYELbAxrfcG 4inl6uBPubSTgTZGHZPduFyk+OFrp3g5ml7ee8LWBavP7Zk4s6uhQ0ypQrW+hwP1 FLTwsBh8GcMpg3ab5pTTvPCUspsyqWZnr7yR7GmkEc1UIpaAhX3DmLYLmUsQir6s J+Z+wYZXEz4srnT51Q6/4W9cwBbZsvia1xL5pc7dF+DDyDKHIza1auOlkHRivzu3 RMqYkH4NyczOu3N8B4SPBUoqAcXDpR8Y4HgBBvlvEZOh3DPqjwzXvsFNaTOCJVNh RViDsVTyiluIfw== X-ME-Sender: X-Sasl-enc: AzDWFPdWlTFffEyWC9px+8x8shzPGrel9X04D4su63IN 1499301118 Received: from aither.local (unknown [76.25.4.24]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 42D897E6F1; Wed, 5 Jul 2017 20:31:58 -0400 (EDT) To: Adam Roach , The IESG References: <149929553958.22745.14506621491893778091.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Cc: precis@ietf.org, draft-ietf-precis-7613bis@ietf.org, precis-chairs@ietf.org From: Peter Saint-Andre Message-ID: <2abafeea-a6de-4cc3-31ff-f790cabfe847@stpeter.im> Date: Wed, 5 Jul 2017 18:31:57 -0600 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.12; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <149929553958.22745.14506621491893778091.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Archived-At: Subject: Re: [precis] Adam Roach's Yes on draft-ietf-precis-7613bis-08: (with COMMENT) X-BeenThere: precis@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: Preparation and Comparison of Internationalized Strings List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 06 Jul 2017 00:32:02 -0000 On 7/5/17 4:58 PM, Adam Roach wrote: > Adam Roach has entered the following ballot position for > draft-ietf-precis-7613bis-08: Yes > > When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all > email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this > introductory paragraph, however.) > > > Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html > for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. > > > The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-precis-7613bis/ > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > COMMENT: > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Nit: The final paragraph of section 1 is missing a paren after "[RFC7622]". > > Nit: Step 2 in section 4.2.2 cites RFC 4013 as text rather than the normal > citation format of [RFC4013] > > I have the same comment as I did on rfc7700bis regarding the implications of > operation idempotence. Acknowledged. Peter From nobody Thu Jul 6 04:37:36 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: precis@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: precis@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BA30E129AF3; Thu, 6 Jul 2017 04:37:29 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.901 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id fDGtaecBP7gM; Thu, 6 Jul 2017 04:37:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from bsa2.jck.com (ns.jck.com [70.88.254.51]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9DBF612704A; Thu, 6 Jul 2017 04:37:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [198.252.137.10] (helo=PSB) by bsa2.jck.com with esmtp (Exim 4.82 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1dT561-0008xi-FK; Thu, 06 Jul 2017 07:37:21 -0400 Date: Thu, 06 Jul 2017 07:37:14 -0400 From: John C Klensin To: Peter Saint-Andre , Ben Campbell cc: precis-chairs@ietf.org, draft-ietf-precis-7564bis@ietf.org, The IESG , precis@ietf.org Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: <149911881124.22832.7633748744729330805.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <7A34BC2E-57EE-43A9-8A44-AC976BE0BBEA@stpeter.im> <51B82F94-462A-493D-ADB4-06B4198DC37C@stpeter.im> X-Mailer: Mulberry/4.0.8 (Win32) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 198.252.137.10 X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: john@jck.com X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on bsa2.jck.com); SAEximRunCond expanded to false Archived-At: Subject: Re: [precis] Ben Campbell's Yes on draft-ietf-precis-7564bis-08: (with COMMENT) X-BeenThere: precis@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: Preparation and Comparison of Internationalized Strings List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 06 Jul 2017 11:37:30 -0000 --On Tuesday, July 4, 2017 17:28 -0600 Peter Saint-Andre wrote: > I propose that we leave Section 13.5 as it is and add the > following paragraph to the end of Section 11.1: > > Note: IANA is requested to not make further updates to this > registry until the issues described in [IAB-Statement] and > Section 13.5 have been settled. While not an ideal solution (it is not clear to me that there is such a thing), this addition removes my objection to processing (and approving and publishing) the PRECIS documents at this time. john From nobody Thu Jul 6 05:47:31 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: precis@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: precis@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EF19112EB43; Thu, 6 Jul 2017 05:47:25 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.901 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ZfRQYHljzSo1; Thu, 6 Jul 2017 05:47:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: from bsa2.jck.com (ns.jck.com [70.88.254.51]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C884A129AF1; Thu, 6 Jul 2017 05:47:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [198.252.137.10] (helo=PSB) by bsa2.jck.com with esmtp (Exim 4.82 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1dT6Bk-00093B-LE; Thu, 06 Jul 2017 08:47:20 -0400 Date: Thu, 06 Jul 2017 08:47:13 -0400 From: John C Klensin To: Peter Saint-Andre , Adam Roach , The IESG cc: precis-chairs@ietf.org, draft-ietf-precis-7564bis@ietf.org, precis@ietf.org Message-ID: <351FA1CF6BB27A6E3363C58E@PSB> In-Reply-To: References: <149929088066.19029.17184582029308905319.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> X-Mailer: Mulberry/4.0.8 (Win32) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 198.252.137.10 X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: john-ietf@jck.com X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on bsa2.jck.com); SAEximRunCond expanded to false Archived-At: Subject: Re: [precis] Adam Roach's Discuss on draft-ietf-precis-7564bis-08: (with DISCUSS) X-BeenThere: precis@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: Preparation and Comparison of Internationalized Strings List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 06 Jul 2017 12:47:26 -0000 --On Wednesday, July 5, 2017 16:58 -0600 Peter Saint-Andre wrote: > On 7/5/17 3:41 PM, Adam Roach wrote: >> Adam Roach has entered the following ballot position for >> draft-ietf-precis-7564bis-08: Discuss >> >> When responding, please keep the subject line intact and >> reply to all email addresses included in the To and CC lines. >> (Feel free to cut this introductory paragraph, however.) >> >> >> Please refer to >> https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html for >> more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. >> >> >> The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found >> here: >> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-precis-7564bis/ >> >> >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------- >> --------- DISCUSS: >> ------------------------------------------------------------- >> --------- >> >> Section 12.5 contains the following normative statement: >> >>> Furthermore, because most languages are typically >>> represented by a single script or a small set of scripts, >>> and because most scripts are typically contained in one or >>> more blocks of code points, the software SHOULD warn the >>> user when presenting a string that mixes code points from >>> more than one script or block, or that uses code points >>> outside the normal range of the user's preferred >>> language(s). >> >> This guidance seems broadly unimplementable for any users >> whose native language uses a non-Latin script. Due in large >> part to the Internet's ASCII heritage, and combined with the >> somewhat ubiquitous use of Latin characters for other >> worldwide purposes (e.g., a quick perusal of Russian- and >> Chinese-language web sites shows numerous examples of Latin >> representations for things like stock ticker symbols and >> metric abbreviations), it seems that the normative >> requirement to warn when "presenting a string that... uses >> code points outside the normal range of the user's preferred >> language(s)" will *either* warn non-Latin-character users >> almost constantly (if Latin is considered outside the range), >> or be broadly useless in preventing spoofing (if it is). >> >> I'm not clever enough to come up with a generalized solution >> for users of all alphabets, so don't have a generic proposal >> here; but I think that the guidance does at least need to be >> properly scoped so that it bears only on warning Latin >> alphabet users of the presence of non-Latin characters, while >> acknowledging that it is probably rather useless when used in >> the opposite direction. I imagine that it still makes sense >> to warn non-Latin users of non-Latin characters outside the >> codepoints used by their language (e.g., warning Greek >> speakers of the presence of Cyrillic characters). > > Good catch. Yes, we could add a carve-out for characters from > the ASCII repertoire when the context is Internet applications > that use such characters. Please be a bit careful about how you frame this. AFAICT, there are actually four relevant cases [1]: (i) Latin-only, but including both ASCII and "decorated" characters. Note that, in the real world, a common typographic and matching convention for some languages is simply to drop diacritical markings when they are inconvenient. (ii) Predominantly Latin (or Latin-expected) mixed with "something else". It is even possible that Latin+Greek and Latin+Cyrillic (and perhaps other Latin-derived scripts) should be treated differently from Latin+SomeUnrelatedScript. (iii) Predominantly a non-Latin script mixed with Latin characters. Again, it may be that the Greek, Cyrillic, and perhaps other Latin-dervied script cases are different from scripts not derived from Latin characters (again, see "digits" below) [3]. (iv) Non-Latin script mixed with a different non-Latin script, remembering that there are more "opportunities" for confusion (and hence more need for caution) between Greek and Cyrillic than between Latin and either one [2] [3]. In addition, there is a nearly-orthogonal issue with so-called "European digits". Those digits are used with a variety of scripts, including Arabic in parts of North Africa and elsewhere, modern Hebrew, and, of course, Greek and Cyrillic. If they are treated as ASCII (or undecorated Latin), rather than as script-free, they imply a problem with the above rules (remember that too many warnings about cases that are almost always safe results in warnings being ignored and/or treated as an irritant); if they are treated as script-independent, it may eliminate possible warnings about the characters in many scripts that look more or less like "l" or "0". > (It's not *necessarily* the case that all applications using > PRECIS are Internet applications or involve ASCII characters - > e.g., perhaps an application deployed on a closed intranet > within, say, the Chinese government could still use the PRECIS > rules to handle input and output strings, without any ASCII > characters ever shown to end users.) Yes, although see the comments above and the notes below. It may also be worth remembering that, whatever normative authority the PRECIS specs have (or we would like them to have), there are separate recommendations for various aspects of the Web (from W3C and WHATWG at least) and generic recommendations from The Unicode Consortium as well as assorted national recommendations. They are not all consistent with each other and there is a tendency for each standards body to believe that its recommendations should dominate all others. I don't know how much of this note (including both the above and the endnotes below) is worth incorporating in these documents (or potential updates to other documents such as RFC 6943), but any new text that is inserted into 7564bis or other PRECIS specs should at least not make things worse. best, john "It is always more complicated" (V. Cerf, possibly derived from Douglas Adams) [1] With apologies to users of scripts developed in recent centuries and largely derived from Latin, I have generally not included them in the categorization above, but the implications and risks should be clear. [2] While Latin script is probably the most common source of borrowed (or appropriated) character forms in recent centuries, it is by no means unique and there are consequently other sub-cases of this case too. This is further complicated by at least two other issues: Sometimes Unicode has specified that the characters borrowed from a base script should be represented by the base script code points; sometimes the graphemes are assigned code points in [partially-] derived script. In the first case, it becomes nearly impossible to write languages using the derived script without including code points that are nominally part of the other script; in the second, there are more opportunities for confusion. The principles underlying those Unicode decisions are, at best, not obvious to a casual user. [3] Whatever decisions are made about these issues, it may be worth remembering that, if NFKC or NFKD are used, even protectively, I know of nothing in Unicode that prevents a character from having a compatibility equivalent in a different script (I believe there are several such cases, but don't have time to dig them out right now). So, if one is going to specify script-based rules and compatibility transformations (or other compatibility relationships), it may be important to specify the order of operations. From nobody Thu Jul 6 07:38:14 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: precis@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: precis@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1B397131678; Thu, 6 Jul 2017 07:38:13 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.721 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.721 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=stpeter.im header.b=lyFiUZpU; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.b=kEeLHoBg Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id M3DeC5Tfveg5; Thu, 6 Jul 2017 07:38:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: from out2-smtp.messagingengine.com (out2-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.26]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9B49F129B37; Thu, 6 Jul 2017 07:38:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: from compute2.internal (compute2.nyi.internal [10.202.2.42]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0C92D209D1; Thu, 6 Jul 2017 10:38:11 -0400 (EDT) Received: from frontend1 ([10.202.2.160]) by compute2.internal (MEProxy); Thu, 06 Jul 2017 10:38:11 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=stpeter.im; h=cc :content-transfer-encoding:content-type:date:from:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:subject:to:x-me-sender :x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc:x-sasl-enc; s=fm1; bh=Ly9SoAnsx5XmAvbH3R DVt0/c9vd4efwSOvcxFWeopaA=; b=lyFiUZpUNZNCx4wE3R63k3kIkxnoXPWhvI nsJxXz+HkYd6obhs2YzJooaWCssY7YPeWp4SBhp4jysMxJm+v0VAjz7T+Gf5hKEJ Hg1C7Tb6NAPAbbL4ltJCFO/iCIcJ8smn1YzmFH8DRZjsR8KJc7XOe1FNmD+HuIWh x2TC2G4MhfiQvORYOqQ2fTf40v28AdzYsJxPko6PcsdBcTRX70beaC42dOn2Obsc SkgXdkalmKd2dZLrvCpqkYvs0r2yuOFAFRo6VtG3Q8Q2LZqwkQSXyK/HVKK7MDFx u0NsWio8YQOOzGWyWZZ5xvMxc3dm+drYl3SBvfMtywdaIQIzNaDw== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc:x-sasl-enc; s= fm1; bh=Ly9SoAnsx5XmAvbH3RDVt0/c9vd4efwSOvcxFWeopaA=; b=kEeLHoBg n0ZtPaJn2bbB9QnYuBRMvz45FySKkhSUjMGfQx9hThpw0qaqHH5ICPPGf5jQOdER 6ft7TIlxRQf2nKyLH6CnUEus7gibk3wE+KFwNGk80FmH3XW9hNvqIcAoXmiJKce8 CqzhDdDsGRNMuP130G0vy1v+rAGEJbrqUOC3OU+jzzHzGYcFZpW7nFxTBJJ40+uu VIHBuKguA1fvxa61JvklncSFBiuw0lVSKD9bDeeETRx5epmT2VVZdBeWqzbgOP28 oxEkxas/02jGtBvOnbDU7Vj2E63Xsuj5oAVWykJ8BCD8Lp0zP19WTsehkrQ3Zycq 9HCa44xzKzVp1Q== X-ME-Sender: X-Sasl-enc: 4Kg1h/XBQ2H1kUJINt7TuQ2Au0LRgpTNWVzZGBo4kheJ 1499351890 Received: from aither.local (unknown [76.25.4.24]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 4AE687E2C1; Thu, 6 Jul 2017 10:38:10 -0400 (EDT) To: John C Klensin , Ben Campbell References: <149911881124.22832.7633748744729330805.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <7A34BC2E-57EE-43A9-8A44-AC976BE0BBEA@stpeter.im> <51B82F94-462A-493D-ADB4-06B4198DC37C@stpeter.im> Cc: precis-chairs@ietf.org, draft-ietf-precis-7564bis@ietf.org, The IESG , precis@ietf.org From: Peter Saint-Andre Message-ID: <489857ed-aca1-b454-f536-1c0764e10efb@stpeter.im> Date: Thu, 6 Jul 2017 08:38:09 -0600 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.12; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Archived-At: Subject: Re: [precis] Ben Campbell's Yes on draft-ietf-precis-7564bis-08: (with COMMENT) X-BeenThere: precis@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: Preparation and Comparison of Internationalized Strings List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 06 Jul 2017 14:38:13 -0000 On 7/6/17 5:37 AM, John C Klensin wrote: > > > --On Tuesday, July 4, 2017 17:28 -0600 Peter Saint-Andre > wrote: > >> I propose that we leave Section 13.5 as it is and add the >> following paragraph to the end of Section 11.1: >> >> Note: IANA is requested to not make further updates to this >> registry until the issues described in [IAB-Statement] and >> Section 13.5 have been settled. > > While not an ideal solution (it is not clear to me that there is > such a thing), this addition removes my objection to processing > (and approving and publishing) the PRECIS documents at this time. Yes, this seems like the best course. Peter From nobody Thu Jul 6 07:45:21 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: precis@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: precis@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BA9D2131648; Thu, 6 Jul 2017 07:45:19 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.901 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id OOA73WHaX_my; Thu, 6 Jul 2017 07:45:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: from bsa2.jck.com (bsa2.jck.com [70.88.254.51]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5D9EA12F092; Thu, 6 Jul 2017 07:45:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [198.252.137.10] (helo=PSB) by bsa2.jck.com with esmtp (Exim 4.82 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1dT81r-0009D7-ND; Thu, 06 Jul 2017 10:45:15 -0400 Date: Thu, 06 Jul 2017 10:45:08 -0400 From: John C Klensin To: Peter Saint-Andre , Ben Campbell cc: precis-chairs@ietf.org, draft-ietf-precis-7564bis@ietf.org, The IESG , precis@ietf.org Message-ID: <5016E035002FFCEF1FE1671F@PSB> In-Reply-To: <489857ed-aca1-b454-f536-1c0764e10efb@stpeter.im> References: <149911881124.22832.7633748744729330805.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <7A34BC2E-57EE-43A9-8A44-AC976BE0BBEA@stpeter.im> <51B82F94-462A-493D-ADB4-06B4198DC37C@stpeter.im> <489857ed-aca1-b454-f536-1c0764e10efb@stpeter.im> X-Mailer: Mulberry/4.0.8 (Win32) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 198.252.137.10 X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: john@jck.com X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on bsa2.jck.com); SAEximRunCond expanded to false Archived-At: Subject: Re: [precis] Ben Campbell's Yes on draft-ietf-precis-7564bis-08: (with COMMENT) X-BeenThere: precis@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: Preparation and Comparison of Internationalized Strings List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 06 Jul 2017 14:45:20 -0000 --On Thursday, July 6, 2017 08:38 -0600 Peter Saint-Andre wrote: >>> Note: IANA is requested to not make further updates to >>> this registry until the issues described in >>> [IAB-Statement] and Section 13.5 have been settled. >> >> While not an ideal solution (it is not clear to me that there >> is such a thing), this addition removes my objection to >> processing (and approving and publishing) the PRECIS >> documents at this time. > > Yes, this seems like the best course. Yeah although extrapolation from the ICANN experience with the IANA IDNA database and the tone of complaints from that direction in combination with how well we seem to be doing about processing, and getting meaningful consensus for, I18n documents more generally, it would be reasonable to translate that statement as something involving "never". Given the statement, I don't see it as useful to further hold up the PRECIS documents, especially because they are a clear improvement over their predecessors, but, IMO, we had better recognize, soon, that we have a problem and start doing something about it. best, john From nobody Thu Jul 6 08:27:01 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: precis@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: precis@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6158B12EB21; Thu, 6 Jul 2017 08:26:54 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.721 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.721 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=stpeter.im header.b=n68P5h17; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.b=eB8JcP2X Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id mvkxz7NY9t9f; Thu, 6 Jul 2017 08:26:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from out2-smtp.messagingengine.com (out2-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.26]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 967F51201FA; Thu, 6 Jul 2017 08:26:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from compute2.internal (compute2.nyi.internal [10.202.2.42]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id DEAA82086C; Thu, 6 Jul 2017 11:26:51 -0400 (EDT) Received: from frontend1 ([10.202.2.160]) by compute2.internal (MEProxy); Thu, 06 Jul 2017 11:26:51 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=stpeter.im; h=cc :content-transfer-encoding:content-type:date:from:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:subject:to:x-me-sender :x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc:x-sasl-enc; s=fm1; bh=SlQvwZlqTxGmqUB8kU U8aHlmgPeJ9u4N+3vVy1/hvIU=; b=n68P5h17VgXJr7kxHzP1v7vATxiqYaQtj7 8lJH20QjxJk0vq/DXYWAQSLuF5qErP6qn7/NKXFeZTpZMz9hTvv/aUMTSFApvSef 3Jj1Mnvna6NuGLHWMkN/IWiw6iR2bfjVpcnzih8gy7YFtgba62B6IPnP9fYfkBzb 2Nf33CeQttVjErelAubLE2tT+p2uo2xMWw/l33QVRTQbltprSGSY4I63U9HBFwV9 VyuHNd96BEfh20RcpjvmrtBGfO3yy3hxXX66UP75wUzEzHGOKeL8Pm+nhJpSTTeg 9/SjJixqgRtACSet10QHpjbiL0dF5mAHMdH2casIOTjqRvoV+b1g== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc:x-sasl-enc; s= fm1; bh=SlQvwZlqTxGmqUB8kUU8aHlmgPeJ9u4N+3vVy1/hvIU=; b=eB8JcP2X lQGPCrWYjHO1Laa8plrW9L/GU6PFBtuvqDv5CaDPACqPxwV9kj3R+ky01TZjMX8T fHvzFBOYq5SX8J143UN0Fh58PKPbOIdPNxlQ7g6YW+VQ1FqjXqM2amBLCGbZEh3o IIudsjNE9aO0GNf6Q2RjiDHtvRTuDqkR56jzr023XN65BeQTp4wtN6Y+pYiXOONC fdLjzd5pv/Zoh9LiBu27GaaeZZibZNRRySQe2lJuFdZqT3P3hMoHY/ZgOVz8Ukl5 9XC5Bu4JyWshoa+uSt+ADJ7QOkBjHLr1qscl2G5ny5qNo5ynoKsVEY6yXF1mn/2E bAAvfwoK0pi2dQ== X-ME-Sender: X-Sasl-enc: AxJBtMEEYdSvUbaiTcQPYRRRwjXMeNwmyz/U9uN/uxA4 1499354811 Received: from aither.local (unknown [76.25.4.24]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 1CCAC7E6B1; Thu, 6 Jul 2017 11:26:50 -0400 (EDT) To: John C Klensin , Ben Campbell References: <149911881124.22832.7633748744729330805.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <7A34BC2E-57EE-43A9-8A44-AC976BE0BBEA@stpeter.im> <51B82F94-462A-493D-ADB4-06B4198DC37C@stpeter.im> <489857ed-aca1-b454-f536-1c0764e10efb@stpeter.im> <5016E035002FFCEF1FE1671F@PSB> Cc: precis-chairs@ietf.org, draft-ietf-precis-7564bis@ietf.org, The IESG , precis@ietf.org From: Peter Saint-Andre Message-ID: <49007a60-6033-08ab-4bc7-a77697d08734@stpeter.im> Date: Thu, 6 Jul 2017 09:26:50 -0600 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.12; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <5016E035002FFCEF1FE1671F@PSB> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Archived-At: Subject: Re: [precis] Ben Campbell's Yes on draft-ietf-precis-7564bis-08: (with COMMENT) X-BeenThere: precis@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: Preparation and Comparison of Internationalized Strings List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 06 Jul 2017 15:26:55 -0000 On 7/6/17 8:45 AM, John C Klensin wrote: > > > --On Thursday, July 6, 2017 08:38 -0600 Peter Saint-Andre > wrote: > >>>> Note: IANA is requested to not make further updates to >>>> this registry until the issues described in >>>> [IAB-Statement] and Section 13.5 have been settled. >>> >>> While not an ideal solution (it is not clear to me that there >>> is such a thing), this addition removes my objection to >>> processing (and approving and publishing) the PRECIS >>> documents at this time. >> >> Yes, this seems like the best course. > > Yeah although extrapolation from the ICANN experience with the > IANA IDNA database and the tone of complaints from that > direction in combination with how well we seem to be doing about > processing, and getting meaningful consensus for, I18n documents > more generally, it would be reasonable to translate that > statement as something involving "never". I hope that's not the case, but I fear you might be right. > Given the statement, > I don't see it as useful to further hold up the PRECIS > documents, especially because they are a clear improvement over > their predecessors, but, IMO, we had better recognize, soon, > that we have a problem and start doing something about it. Very much agreed. Peter From nobody Sun Jul 9 15:27:02 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: precis@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: precis@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D84C61200FC; Sun, 9 Jul 2017 15:26:55 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.7 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=stpeter.im header.b=Mzf16+TE; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.b=kRn4bbzZ Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id FQ_DY-nYKFQm; Sun, 9 Jul 2017 15:26:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from out3-smtp.messagingengine.com (out3-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.27]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DDF991200ED; Sun, 9 Jul 2017 15:26:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: from compute2.internal (compute2.nyi.internal [10.202.2.42]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 41146206EA; Sun, 9 Jul 2017 18:26:53 -0400 (EDT) Received: from frontend2 ([10.202.2.161]) by compute2.internal (MEProxy); Sun, 09 Jul 2017 18:26:53 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=stpeter.im; h=cc :content-transfer-encoding:content-type:date:from:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:subject:to:x-me-sender :x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc:x-sasl-enc; s=fm1; bh=W/iW/aA1Mte2fP+gRf LqB7NmS6HDQ0RPW+Zl8/564uk=; b=Mzf16+TEYM8cDjUYj8VdNCdCbiNXvIbcd6 iupDOO9ZEda2MfSrs88uiAEoXLp8/cij3JiJ72An6H9FasHD/hSFCImls2rQ7NwQ UF3btaW7dEgHU+XbGY9ATkIy4Q5zRHxxL8GaBrnQtfg4j8VxAcczeG2jscOF/OhQ EMH7eFb/+JOzPEPgH+v4w6UHSZ/iGPi+y8I+demy3Ry54gaL7cU+8zTs5ultnuPr VeK3tvuPO+PfMOCg2j5NZo/A9oItCOPI+8d9CNIrNMzpDmQgrhzgsaPPYKZYXHJV YvXG8xbHSXy2HGKE8zYxyleXxaxSVzA+7kOnice1tHyCt8/1vwZg== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc:x-sasl-enc; s= fm1; bh=W/iW/aA1Mte2fP+gRfLqB7NmS6HDQ0RPW+Zl8/564uk=; b=kRn4bbzZ lEj0buqeu/GLctuTr8STlQObnisTlAJpkDXjkXgBkAYySDI8CdhVcvt8cK/prTy+ Ra8C056FBEwTnw/2UsytrN9Giwf3B8LX1aJVgkOAYBE+8V1CqUeI8qnzLzyLCfBm TzWKtLKGen4LUz9NuEjK+qA+07yFJKce8hBlF+rib6W3qn+FCXw6UBw8KaafXJDn 26OHayf+X0flQ2j4XDmY0g+Cp+YXYusNioPnvSCRVN3BuJUYE+7sMYnaBJSmXVif flqpQU5D9Jte+2uC0VC/88bpzKoXcaPmrkAL1X2wP7NKRCVZIi7pFT4AgZOAeuDA iLesfPJ6IO66wQ== X-ME-Sender: X-Sasl-enc: paiNJtxCl6S3pgYJrgq469LoOMw3NQh8v6LcjMzyFlOK 1499639212 Received: from aither.local (unknown [76.25.4.24]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 8A2992424D; Sun, 9 Jul 2017 18:26:52 -0400 (EDT) To: Adam Roach , The IESG References: <149929280791.22663.592778419584772415.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <1ad40fa7-6696-7fab-b753-c4913ca445e3@stpeter.im> Cc: draft-ietf-precis-7700bis@ietf.org, precis@ietf.org, precis-chairs@ietf.org From: Peter Saint-Andre Message-ID: <95af3895-1905-955f-61ee-990db2003611@stpeter.im> Date: Sun, 9 Jul 2017 16:26:51 -0600 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.12; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <1ad40fa7-6696-7fab-b753-c4913ca445e3@stpeter.im> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Archived-At: Subject: Re: [precis] Adam Roach's Yes on draft-ietf-precis-7700bis-08: (with COMMENT) X-BeenThere: precis@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: Preparation and Comparison of Internationalized Strings List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 09 Jul 2017 22:26:56 -0000 On 7/5/17 4:41 PM, Peter Saint-Andre wrote: > On 7/5/17 4:13 PM, Adam Roach wrote: >> Adam Roach has entered the following ballot position for >> draft-ietf-precis-7700bis-08: Yes >> >> When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all >> email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this >> introductory paragraph, however.) >> >> >> Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html >> for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. >> >> >> The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: >> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-precis-7700bis/ >> >> >> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >> COMMENT: >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >> >> I like the clear explanation of some of the design choices in here (e.g., the >> rationale for using NFKC). >> >> There are two places that I think a slight bit of additional text might be >> useful: >> >> 1. When talking about processing "each string" in section 2.4, it's probably >> worth noting that implementations should be careful not to assume that any >> information received from a wire protocol has necessarily had any of the rules >> in this document applied to it (as this might allow intentionally noncompliant >> clients to slip certain kinds of shenanigans past their checks); and > > draft-ietf-precis-7564bis contains the following sentence: > > When an application applies a profile of a PRECIS string class, it > transforms an input string (which might or might not be conforming) > into an output string that definitively conforms to the profile. > > It strikes me that something similar would be useful here, especially > the concepts of "input string" and "output string". I'd like to propose that we add the following text at the end of Section 2.3 on Enforcement: The result of the foregoing operations is an output string that conforms to the Nickname profile. Until an application produces such an output string, it MUST NOT treat the string as conforming (in particular, it MUST NOT assume that an input string is conforming before the enforcement operation has been completed). And the following text at the end of Section 2.4 on Comparison: Until an application determines whether two strings are to be considered equivalent, it MUST NOT treat them as equivalent (in particular, it MUST NOT assume that an input string conforms to the rules before the comparison operation has been completed). Would that address the concern? (I'd add similar text in 7613bis.) >> 2. Where the final paragraph of section 4 indicates that the operations in this >> document are not necessarily idempotent, it is probably worth being more >> explicit that they should be applied repeatedly until the output string is >> stable; or, if the string does not stabilize after a reasonable number of >> iterations (is this possible?), that it should be rejected as invalid. > > Thanks for the suggestion; although we might think that's implicit in > the notion of non-idempotence, it's much better to make the > ramifications and handling explicit. I'll add this text in the post-IESG > version. Does the following text address the concern? Implementation experience has shown that applying the rules for the Nickname profile is not an idempotent procedure for all code points. Therefore, an implementation SHOULD apply the rules repeatedly until the output string is stable; if the output string does not stabilize within a reasonable number of iterations, the implementation SHOULD terminate application of the rules and reject the input string as invalid. Peter From nobody Sun Jul 9 16:07:03 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: precis@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: precis@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 45A1B12EC19; Sun, 9 Jul 2017 16:07:02 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.7 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=stpeter.im header.b=b3hzpgjF; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.b=RdwtaRtD Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id r_BO9UzZBx6K; Sun, 9 Jul 2017 16:07:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from out3-smtp.messagingengine.com (out3-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.27]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B9A2912EC11; Sun, 9 Jul 2017 16:07:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from compute2.internal (compute2.nyi.internal [10.202.2.42]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id E85B020736; Sun, 9 Jul 2017 19:06:59 -0400 (EDT) Received: from frontend2 ([10.202.2.161]) by compute2.internal (MEProxy); Sun, 09 Jul 2017 19:06:59 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=stpeter.im; h=cc :content-transfer-encoding:content-type:date:from:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:subject:to:x-me-sender :x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc:x-sasl-enc; s=fm1; bh=TGlONeePMBamXz2wpN ZnhRhUKHR1qG+HdQHwjsF4MqI=; b=b3hzpgjFaetlPp91hfVbBkQqk35wv85oYB DMzcvstKYt8NV+NNBnP1xnKoSDfaT2c2iF4C986+6fjv76464S5o56V26VxkwAVR /cdxDv02/Qm88dda6SEbgaTG+H7mhFDaij1IGtE5X4cF3rIqqLYP9yldnLznt4mZ R4AidSk2h/AmZVzOzuc/qvVE9L8Li9Iz3eQGTjKPGflMuf/xDMyPr2Q/7i9A8lBe CKDGC3ht76xuTr3NWYKyCOpLRzSsqOgUVj1IeA6CC6CCeXshsPfj3+mxxRF6pBBB gt4PrzSXQCF4tfg033T+Bvbz3unS7gyZ4xJ4+HRYt6hcJMZHt79A== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc:x-sasl-enc; s= fm1; bh=TGlONeePMBamXz2wpNZnhRhUKHR1qG+HdQHwjsF4MqI=; b=RdwtaRtD 55tf0g8d1TUD517NzB3e9Nx2BHsm8vxjDW/PJ3qZ/uHIsapiv5ec0ou6zN/L5g8J 4ucqCby/xqR0HuU4qRmFdIBUyi1XnnV3Bzb7KJCkhyGyPTiUdy2ee0Gui1lzoXBW svRRee66cRXem4pPcvkd1tx3ZCgPIO/QP/v9207Yz5dMPhgL2CYqncWblbrZzG4G XXyJLIjjyIS2Zw6KFV4eaGUoP2W3Z3ANIkJ+jH6XSqmtgnAzKU0UvTKmaOmnWQXt uTtaurly8iN888DbBis3UzFytMooeiJl+QSnN7fKg8zVrtM1djC5TSIobnWxKuLZ Fsi/mVakRKM+pw== X-ME-Sender: X-Sasl-enc: raz+TOVITL/Ueriuy5JJVyB9KF8Kdy8aXXMBs0xI/J+y 1499641619 Received: from aither.local (unknown [76.25.4.24]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id E5E302424D; Sun, 9 Jul 2017 19:06:58 -0400 (EDT) To: Eric Rescorla , The IESG References: <149928584901.19925.8246271341938785575.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Cc: draft-ietf-precis-7564bis@ietf.org, precis@ietf.org, precis-chairs@ietf.org From: Peter Saint-Andre Message-ID: <2892ae47-89cb-37f8-f248-9c96aba6d637@stpeter.im> Date: Sun, 9 Jul 2017 17:06:57 -0600 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.12; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <149928584901.19925.8246271341938785575.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Archived-At: Subject: Re: [precis] Eric Rescorla's No Objection on draft-ietf-precis-7564bis-08: (with COMMENT) X-BeenThere: precis@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: Preparation and Comparison of Internationalized Strings List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 09 Jul 2017 23:07:02 -0000 On 7/5/17 2:17 PM, Eric Rescorla wrote: > Eric Rescorla has entered the following ballot position for > draft-ietf-precis-7564bis-08: No Objection > > When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all > email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this > introductory paragraph, however.) > > > Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html > for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. > > > The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-precis-7564bis/ > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > COMMENT: > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > A table comparing Identifier and Freeform code point rules would not go unappreciated Were you thinking of something like the following? +===========================+=================+===============+ | CATEGORY | IDENTIFIERCLASS | FREEFORMCLASS | +===========================+=================+===============+ | LetterDigits | Valid | Valid | +---------------------------+-----------------+---------------+ | Unstable | [N/A (unused)] | +---------------------------+-----------------+---------------+ | IgnorableProperties | [N/A (unused)] | +---------------------------+-----------------+---------------+ | IgnorableBlocks | [N/A (unused)] | +---------------------------+-----------------+---------------+ | LDH | [N/A (unused)] | +---------------------------+-----------------+---------------+ | Exceptions | Contextual | Contextual | | | Rule Required | Rule Required | +---------------------------+-----------------+---------------+ | BackwardCompatible | [Handled by IDNA Rules] | +---------------------------+-----------------+---------------+ | JoinControl | Contextual | Contextual | | | Rule Required | Required | +---------------------------+-----------------+---------------+ | OldHangulJamo | Disallowed | Disallowed | +---------------------------+-----------------+---------------+ | Unassigned | Unassigned | Unassigned | +---------------------------+-----------------+---------------+ | ASCII7 | Valid | Valid | +---------------------------+-----------------+---------------+ | Controls | Disallowed | Disallowed | +---------------------------+-----------------+---------------+ | PrecisIgnorableProperties | Disallowed | Disallowed | +---------------------------+-----------------+---------------+ | Spaces | Disallowed | Valid | +---------------------------+-----------------+---------------+ | Symbols | Disallowed | Valid | +---------------------------+-----------------+---------------+ | Punctuation | Disallowed | Valid | +---------------------------+-----------------+---------------+ | HasCompat | Disallowed | Valid | +---------------------------+-----------------+---------------+ | OtherLetterDigits | Disallowed | Valid | +---------------------------+-----------------+---------------+ Table 1: Comparative Disposition of Code Points /psa From nobody Sun Jul 9 16:10:20 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: precis@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: precis@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 53D8912EC30 for ; Sun, 9 Jul 2017 16:10:14 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.898 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.898 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=rtfm-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id QMr0yAT6CA0r for ; Sun, 9 Jul 2017 16:10:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-yb0-x235.google.com (mail-yb0-x235.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4002:c09::235]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D765713010C for ; Sun, 9 Jul 2017 16:10:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-yb0-x235.google.com with SMTP id f194so23167617yba.3 for ; Sun, 09 Jul 2017 16:10:09 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=rtfm-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=VQE/PzhPND6sQcSVBr/CVNx6hbkXAYyFbixqFblq+/o=; b=jnEUz6rNod3Pu1JRAEI4fXh+Nv5jsPdsr8FxLRB00jdk99uEvJ2PelDJ/siosjYNcw Ny2rGp4yZNAm5K1EBMF/sWR+ytx7iS3Ff1u5/clKIVxRXHXeqsVgBDfFg7hBxmJSJv1Z LJ7WM6NRGL14fEG1SI0GP0MmBXjDSTYTjGXo0frZJ3OHfhbx589JJrDhXcthUoRL29x3 0J0SR3lciOHGa8pyFQ1OknRks+e2Q6dH8TV9wobWf3btv0C+2YotVxiGx6XKsFQ35u3K Xyl+FUOl+5nLK+GvR3VlunTUwreIlES8dnM4zy0uEsN1o0DpkQsAnAH6BIFVlhfh8RGf SCZg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=VQE/PzhPND6sQcSVBr/CVNx6hbkXAYyFbixqFblq+/o=; b=tMNvupPKfUYXDCzvEbNvocMkGtxAEmSmhS9AzeozxNOpV08ixT6Zv1gS91xmEOncxM 78ejvPFYvV69NspA0e1mnBPJ3ji+XjWIvT0KvRN7L7SaeFpLisrWHyfIJSUlemMZDdZX QS+arPPZ+jVa6HtlV35OXxa/fdVR6ykSkpaJYwRlGO2D0d3BZ8fgVREHg2KYV8oEWASX 7m971W83yZno/2Lk9s2yVkbX3GvoDF3YSkUZcjCZiQ6axK60tq+9y7vwta0pTmz1nkz7 ZYVoltOk7EMQzbYoI2aMOx8xzZRZwftZV7a6JkpydqvjeUgoYDRh2zkR1ISTGG3US446 6Grg== X-Gm-Message-State: AIVw112oqF2IUoBKoVhfn4fG5DuZ2RABLmxAyX+yVUgr0MqiV49Q8Bgq XKWXRgO4UelNRI0lhi+QET8O1iQd976z X-Received: by 10.37.48.67 with SMTP id w64mr12357053ybw.89.1499641809044; Sun, 09 Jul 2017 16:10:09 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.13.215.9 with HTTP; Sun, 9 Jul 2017 16:09:28 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <2892ae47-89cb-37f8-f248-9c96aba6d637@stpeter.im> References: <149928584901.19925.8246271341938785575.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <2892ae47-89cb-37f8-f248-9c96aba6d637@stpeter.im> From: Eric Rescorla Date: Sun, 9 Jul 2017 16:09:28 -0700 Message-ID: To: Peter Saint-Andre Cc: The IESG , draft-ietf-precis-7564bis@ietf.org, precis@ietf.org, precis-chairs@ietf.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001a114899c451b8f40553ea91cb" Archived-At: Subject: Re: [precis] Eric Rescorla's No Objection on draft-ietf-precis-7564bis-08: (with COMMENT) X-BeenThere: precis@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: Preparation and Comparison of Internationalized Strings List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 09 Jul 2017 23:10:14 -0000 --001a114899c451b8f40553ea91cb Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Yes, something like that.... -Ekr On Sun, Jul 9, 2017 at 4:06 PM, Peter Saint-Andre wrote: > On 7/5/17 2:17 PM, Eric Rescorla wrote: > > Eric Rescorla has entered the following ballot position for > > draft-ietf-precis-7564bis-08: No Objection > > > > When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all > > email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this > > introductory paragraph, however.) > > > > > > Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria. > html > > for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. > > > > > > The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: > > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-precis-7564bis/ > > > > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > COMMENT: > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > A table comparing Identifier and Freeform code point rules would not go > unappreciated > > Were you thinking of something like the following? > > +===========================+=================+===============+ > | CATEGORY | IDENTIFIERCLASS | FREEFORMCLASS | > +===========================+=================+===============+ > | LetterDigits | Valid | Valid | > +---------------------------+-----------------+---------------+ > | Unstable | [N/A (unused)] | > +---------------------------+-----------------+---------------+ > | IgnorableProperties | [N/A (unused)] | > +---------------------------+-----------------+---------------+ > | IgnorableBlocks | [N/A (unused)] | > +---------------------------+-----------------+---------------+ > | LDH | [N/A (unused)] | > +---------------------------+-----------------+---------------+ > | Exceptions | Contextual | Contextual | > | | Rule Required | Rule Required | > +---------------------------+-----------------+---------------+ > | BackwardCompatible | [Handled by IDNA Rules] | > +---------------------------+-----------------+---------------+ > | JoinControl | Contextual | Contextual | > | | Rule Required | Required | > +---------------------------+-----------------+---------------+ > | OldHangulJamo | Disallowed | Disallowed | > +---------------------------+-----------------+---------------+ > | Unassigned | Unassigned | Unassigned | > +---------------------------+-----------------+---------------+ > | ASCII7 | Valid | Valid | > +---------------------------+-----------------+---------------+ > | Controls | Disallowed | Disallowed | > +---------------------------+-----------------+---------------+ > | PrecisIgnorableProperties | Disallowed | Disallowed | > +---------------------------+-----------------+---------------+ > | Spaces | Disallowed | Valid | > +---------------------------+-----------------+---------------+ > | Symbols | Disallowed | Valid | > +---------------------------+-----------------+---------------+ > | Punctuation | Disallowed | Valid | > +---------------------------+-----------------+---------------+ > | HasCompat | Disallowed | Valid | > +---------------------------+-----------------+---------------+ > | OtherLetterDigits | Disallowed | Valid | > +---------------------------+-----------------+---------------+ > > Table 1: Comparative Disposition of Code Points > > /psa > > --001a114899c451b8f40553ea91cb Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Yes, something like that....

-Ekr
=


On Sun, Jul 9, 2017 at 4:06 PM, Peter Saint-Andre <= ;stpeter@stpeter.im= > wrote:
On 7/5/17 2:17 PM, Eric Rescorla wrote:
> Eric Rescorla has entered the following ballot position for
> draft-ietf-precis-7564bis-08: No Objection
>
> When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all<= br> > email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut thi= s
> introductory paragraph, however.)
>
>
> Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/i= esg/statement/discuss-criteria.html
> for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.
>
>
> The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: > https://datatracker.ietf.org/do= c/draft-ietf-precis-7564bis/
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------= ----------
> COMMENT:
> ------------------------------------------------------------= ----------
>
> A table comparing Identifier and Freeform code point rules would not g= o unappreciated

Were you thinking of something like the following?

=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 +=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D+=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D+=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D+
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 |=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 CATEGORY=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2= =A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0| IDENTIFIERCLASS | FREEFORMCLASS |
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 +=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D+=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D+=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D+
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 | LetterDigits=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2= =A0 =C2=A0 | Valid=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0| Valid=C2=A0 = =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0|
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 +---------------------------+-----------------+--= -------------+
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 | Unstable=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 = =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 |=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 [N/A (unused)]=C2= =A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0|
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 +---------------------------+-----------------+--= -------------+
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 | IgnorableProperties=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0|=C2= =A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 [N/A (unused)]=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 = =C2=A0|
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 +---------------------------+-----------------+--= -------------+
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 | IgnorableBlocks=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 = =C2=A0|=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 [N/A (unused)]=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2= =A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0|
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 +---------------------------+-----------------+--= -------------+
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 | LDH=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 = =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0|=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 [N/A = (unused)]=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0|
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 +---------------------------+-----------------+--= -------------+
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 | Exceptions=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 = =C2=A0 =C2=A0 | Contextual=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 | Contextual=C2=A0 =C2=A0 |<= br> =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 |=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2= =A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0| Rule Required=C2=A0 =C2=A0| = Rule Required |
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 +---------------------------+-----------------+--= -------------+
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 | BackwardCompatible=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 |=C2= =A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 [Handled by IDNA Rules]=C2=A0 =C2=A0 |
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 +---------------------------+-----------------+--= -------------+
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 | JoinControl=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0= =C2=A0 =C2=A0| Contextual=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 | Contextual=C2=A0 =C2=A0 |<= br> =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 |=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2= =A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0| Rule Required=C2=A0 =C2=A0| = Required=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 |
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 +---------------------------+-----------------+--= -------------+
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 | OldHangulJamo=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2= =A0 =C2=A0| Disallowed=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 | Disallowed=C2=A0 =C2=A0 |
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 +---------------------------+-----------------+--= -------------+
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 | Unassigned=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 = =C2=A0 =C2=A0 | Unassigned=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 | Unassigned=C2=A0 =C2=A0 |<= br> =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 +---------------------------+-----------------+--= -------------+
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 | ASCII7=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2= =A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 | Valid=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0| = Valid=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0|
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 +---------------------------+-----------------+--= -------------+
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 | Controls=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 = =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 | Disallowed=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 | Disallowed=C2=A0 = =C2=A0 |
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 +---------------------------+-----------------+--= -------------+
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 | PrecisIgnorableProperties | Disallowed=C2=A0 =C2=A0 = =C2=A0 | Disallowed=C2=A0 =C2=A0 |
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 +---------------------------+-----------------+--= -------------+
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 | Spaces=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2= =A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 | Disallowed=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 | Valid=C2=A0 =C2= =A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0|
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 +---------------------------+-----------------+--= -------------+
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 | Symbols=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2= =A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0| Disallowed=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 | Valid=C2=A0 =C2= =A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0|
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 +---------------------------+-----------------+--= -------------+
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 | Punctuation=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0= =C2=A0 =C2=A0| Disallowed=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 | Valid=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 = =C2=A0 =C2=A0|
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 +---------------------------+-----------------+--= -------------+
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 | HasCompat=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 = =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0| Disallowed=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 | Valid=C2=A0 =C2=A0 = =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0|
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 +---------------------------+-----------------+--= -------------+
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 | OtherLetterDigits=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0|= Disallowed=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 | Valid=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0|<= br> =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 +---------------------------+-----------------+--= -------------+

=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 Table 1: Comparative Dispo= sition of Code Points

/psa


--001a114899c451b8f40553ea91cb-- From nobody Sun Jul 16 16:21:08 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: precis@ietf.org Delivered-To: precis@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4BC32129B19; Sun, 16 Jul 2017 16:20:56 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: internet-drafts@ietf.org To: Cc: precis@ietf.org X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.56.0 Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Precedence: bulk Message-ID: <150024725625.303.17137036571104960991@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Sun, 16 Jul 2017 16:20:56 -0700 Archived-At: Subject: [precis] I-D Action: draft-ietf-precis-7564bis-09.txt X-BeenThere: precis@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 List-Id: Preparation and Comparison of Internationalized Strings List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 16 Jul 2017 23:20:56 -0000 A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the Preparation and Comparison of Internationalized Strings of the IETF. Title : PRECIS Framework: Preparation, Enforcement, and Comparison of Internationalized Strings in Application Protocols Authors : Peter Saint-Andre Marc Blanchet Filename : draft-ietf-precis-7564bis-09.txt Pages : 44 Date : 2017-07-16 Abstract: Application protocols using Unicode code points in protocol strings need to properly handle such strings in order to enforce internationalization rules for strings placed in various protocol slots (such as addresses and identifiers) and to perform valid comparison operations (e.g., for purposes of authentication or authorization). This document defines a framework enabling application protocols to perform the preparation, enforcement, and comparison of internationalized strings ("PRECIS") in a way that depends on the properties of Unicode code points and thus is more agile with respect to versions of Unicode. As a result, this framework provides a more sustainable approach to the handling of internationalized strings than the previous framework, known as Stringprep (RFC 3454). This document obsoletes RFC 7564. The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-precis-7564bis/ There are also htmlized versions available at: https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-precis-7564bis-09 https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-precis-7564bis-09 A diff from the previous version is available at: https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-precis-7564bis-09 Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org. Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ From nobody Sun Jul 16 16:21:29 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: precis@ietf.org Delivered-To: precis@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F28FA12EAAA; Sun, 16 Jul 2017 16:21:22 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: internet-drafts@ietf.org To: Cc: precis@ietf.org X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.56.0 Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Precedence: bulk Message-ID: <150024728294.32540.17247803819095288873@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Sun, 16 Jul 2017 16:21:22 -0700 Archived-At: Subject: [precis] I-D Action: draft-ietf-precis-7613bis-09.txt X-BeenThere: precis@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 List-Id: Preparation and Comparison of Internationalized Strings List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 16 Jul 2017 23:21:23 -0000 A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the Preparation and Comparison of Internationalized Strings of the IETF. Title : Preparation, Enforcement, and Comparison of Internationalized Strings Representing Usernames and Passwords Authors : Peter Saint-Andre Alexey Melnikov Filename : draft-ietf-precis-7613bis-09.txt Pages : 27 Date : 2017-07-16 Abstract: This document describes updated methods for handling Unicode strings representing usernames and passwords. The previous approach was known as SASLprep (RFC 4013) and was based on stringprep (RFC 3454). The methods specified in this document provide a more sustainable approach to the handling of internationalized usernames and passwords. This document obsoletes RFC 7613. The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-precis-7613bis/ There are also htmlized versions available at: https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-precis-7613bis-09 https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-precis-7613bis-09 A diff from the previous version is available at: https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-precis-7613bis-09 Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org. Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ From nobody Sun Jul 16 16:22:15 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: precis@ietf.org Delivered-To: precis@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 66CCE12EAA5; Sun, 16 Jul 2017 16:22:13 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: internet-drafts@ietf.org To: Cc: precis@ietf.org X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.56.0 Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Precedence: bulk Message-ID: <150024733338.32741.6173660200011865321@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Sun, 16 Jul 2017 16:22:13 -0700 Archived-At: Subject: [precis] I-D Action: draft-ietf-precis-7700bis-09.txt X-BeenThere: precis@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 List-Id: Preparation and Comparison of Internationalized Strings List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 16 Jul 2017 23:22:13 -0000 A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the Preparation and Comparison of Internationalized Strings of the IETF. Title : Preparation, Enforcement, and Comparison of Internationalized Strings Representing Nicknames Author : Peter Saint-Andre Filename : draft-ietf-precis-7700bis-09.txt Pages : 12 Date : 2017-07-16 Abstract: This document describes methods for handling Unicode strings representing memorable, human-friendly names (called "nicknames", "display names", or "petnames") for people, devices, accounts, websites, and other entities. This document obsoletes RFC 7700. The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-precis-7700bis/ There are also htmlized versions available at: https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-precis-7700bis-09 https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-precis-7700bis-09 A diff from the previous version is available at: https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-precis-7700bis-09 Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org. Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ From nobody Sun Jul 16 16:24:00 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: precis@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: precis@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 73FF0129B33 for ; Sun, 16 Jul 2017 16:23:59 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.721 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.721 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=stpeter.im header.b=bj9x/5DO; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.b=MMnuLMj+ Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id nzG0hx1MUaTh for ; Sun, 16 Jul 2017 16:23:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from out1-smtp.messagingengine.com (out1-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.25]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AFBF91200C1 for ; Sun, 16 Jul 2017 16:23:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from compute2.internal (compute2.nyi.internal [10.202.2.42]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 23CA820692; Sun, 16 Jul 2017 19:23:58 -0400 (EDT) Received: from frontend1 ([10.202.2.160]) by compute2.internal (MEProxy); Sun, 16 Jul 2017 19:23:58 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=stpeter.im; h= content-transfer-encoding:content-type:date:from:message-id :mime-version:subject:to:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc :x-sasl-enc; s=fm1; bh=EQAKj6f5mfvmApxlv3kV/mqD4P1rOV++dFl1/7AsC XE=; b=bj9x/5DOre93yRAg7JgtEygOy58h/hqlN4MzEJHIL/VWR8XnoM15MtT95 r45Zq+2n9ggYKesik1POvRZrEgYfLR7ep+GB5COWI+2FU2Ril1JXWu/Jl2rkEFAI E5ffTKY+P1m+VYQG2DG0AOwRpewxJ0MMFr9CH+qg0uIvzws0ozlkQ4vORNv9m/F6 sp3K5vf0k6vEI47h7GWmdIIF3cLfqo/59JtE5GvgDSlhBdsBYp8ATfxrqQlpdL6F RGa3O+ncf1Pg6f6qcABkao/hr4c2elKIci+vZEg6vBXAdZgYOYFIm5dGSna0Zjx8 9zyn+UluEshAhf+fnvLGI5UG1uUXg== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:message-id:mime-version:subject:to:x-me-sender :x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc:x-sasl-enc; s=fm1; bh=EQAKj6f5mfvmApxlv3 kV/mqD4P1rOV++dFl1/7AsCXE=; b=MMnuLMj+jYN3kylCDo3U6Po7v15g/m7i5H 5ToqHVGBCDm353w8zgk/Evh3OeHr8e69RS1TTH5GPyka2AgjQ2F2l2BiU983dmBG xk+1FtZdJeVMuz3MP00isNx4QSspcG3n/UfdVIPPUL/0ouTxk+y+4UYNLa78+s4/ v1wvMcX9Xbar/84UZQ/Vgvd957HC+R74lDF/W2+LKfOh8rHXRBfUclnTA+oyDuzg ZOxDzNT9qRlBBiS6808TUWVFLkHk18sz/36SegACYoqj1kB1x1w90zsQemegYBWa rE0L4tvQMjPDkTVrPSuMg1N6dF786KMGFPlssd0O7zq/Bsx2/Mcg== X-ME-Sender: X-Sasl-enc: 1abqLoxA/MUXVJWr1P9H04CwYEZVwkjAbyp885mEop1n 1500247437 Received: from aither.local (unknown [76.25.4.24]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id BF1247E17A; Sun, 16 Jul 2017 19:23:57 -0400 (EDT) To: "precis@ietf.org" From: Peter Saint-Andre Message-ID: <3860ad40-1a97-d26b-5eb5-df52f6ffd18c@stpeter.im> Date: Sun, 16 Jul 2017 17:23:57 -0600 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.12; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Archived-At: Subject: [precis] -09 drafts X-BeenThere: precis@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: Preparation and Comparison of Internationalized Strings List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 16 Jul 2017 23:23:59 -0000 The just-submitted -09 drafts address feedback received from IESG and directorate reviews. Peter From nobody Tue Jul 18 00:41:03 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: precis@ietf.org Delivered-To: precis@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 092FE131691; Tue, 18 Jul 2017 00:40:55 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: Adam Roach To: "The IESG" Cc: draft-ietf-precis-7564bis@ietf.org, Marc Blanchet , precis-chairs@ietf.org, Marc.Blanchet@viagenie.ca, precis@ietf.org X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.56.0 Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Precedence: bulk Message-ID: <150036365503.11377.11074188909004528124.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Tue, 18 Jul 2017 00:40:55 -0700 Archived-At: Subject: [precis] Adam Roach's No Objection on draft-ietf-precis-7564bis-09: (with COMMENT) X-BeenThere: precis@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 List-Id: Preparation and Comparison of Internationalized Strings List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 18 Jul 2017 07:40:55 -0000 Adam Roach has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-precis-7564bis-09: No Objection When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this introductory paragraph, however.) Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-precis-7564bis/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- COMMENT: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Thanks for addressing my discuss. From nobody Wed Jul 19 18:40:49 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: precis@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: precis@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CED81129ACD for ; Wed, 19 Jul 2017 18:40:46 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.721 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.721 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=stpeter.im header.b=W9e3w5wi; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.b=r+wt+KzR Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id jLcI2wLiYcFW for ; Wed, 19 Jul 2017 18:40:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: from out1-smtp.messagingengine.com (out1-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.25]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6537E126E64 for ; Wed, 19 Jul 2017 18:40:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: from compute2.internal (compute2.nyi.internal [10.202.2.42]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id D546C20852; Wed, 19 Jul 2017 21:40:44 -0400 (EDT) Received: from frontend2 ([10.202.2.161]) by compute2.internal (MEProxy); Wed, 19 Jul 2017 21:40:44 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=stpeter.im; h= content-transfer-encoding:content-type:date:from:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:subject:to:x-me-sender :x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc:x-sasl-enc; s=fm1; bh=maNNya0c0pMg9qGZTY 3EjP4ODxANazat4QUWbuL6kkM=; b=W9e3w5wibo/h3qheHZrNeqp3HhqTJ+1b/l +q4WdHBATlJdEmE2vwjUYS9rliS4FQ5jfVhXxzYuQZGsnP3z5QIyh7lwRx0drfm2 2iPcO8WH00vNM7BLwuKohMrYWLQiwhaezl8kOver4aIB7/ENleaTmLURlHU2tUNg KehyN42Ko73D6VyiiOcIp7Sq93T6icWfTouCWw7g835+Iqvimod9B9DnnDgdS1OK 2HYW7oKGBdy1Sjbw8LJRg7K/f5zUXsFooyL+AY6O9+9mDnVImjnXhGCwYW2/K2m3 yA8R2BIPkK/27XAxZnyKgaMWp+Tjn03z5azMsdiH07BwFqHgflrw== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc:x-sasl-enc; s= fm1; bh=maNNya0c0pMg9qGZTY3EjP4ODxANazat4QUWbuL6kkM=; b=r+wt+KzR WokAHztpYUjnbGPJKPHDCm3otO0cyrJRYdV8yLDE8kFxE9lWamHBqFcnci3cX2L3 iFOLQ/e1+Qq1M+6jMT8mQ/r8nilG34upWLt828FzlfYOb2nnLim2kw6z9bPM2YWy b27B3VCMABlm1c3l+IMPXV5oNrqm6M8iezo3Bz+ic5IiJ9nzDznB6x1hs2wiP65I swVp4SHhqWP7XprnWTeWI0Cj3N1x5Id5V4ZnmesIxHGCHVpF3XM9qQO3y6JpZnCR LL7o6VwwK5ExLHT1L4/NmLJWPBJti2aabxg8NB7CT8SAAMX/TyeQ1Dy8FAkJPCEn DGDA9eccc394Lg== X-ME-Sender: X-Sasl-enc: mRZZO/38l3wOZMLABc65gjso7scPixIfSl2MLBjkEeJD 1500514844 Received: from aither.local (unknown [76.25.4.24]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 5600D2418A; Wed, 19 Jul 2017 21:40:44 -0400 (EDT) References: <150024725625.303.17137036571104960991@ietfa.amsl.com> To: precis@ietf.org From: Peter Saint-Andre Message-ID: <33f7468c-6742-7cbe-fa6f-70002c35cc62@stpeter.im> Date: Wed, 19 Jul 2017 19:40:42 -0600 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.12; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <150024725625.303.17137036571104960991@ietfa.amsl.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Archived-At: Subject: Re: [precis] I-D Action: draft-ietf-precis-7564bis-09.txt X-BeenThere: precis@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: Preparation and Comparison of Internationalized Strings List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 20 Jul 2017 01:40:47 -0000 On 7/16/17 5:20 PM, internet-drafts@ietf.org wrote: > > A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. > This draft is a work item of the Preparation and Comparison of Internationalized Strings of the IETF. > > Title : PRECIS Framework: Preparation, Enforcement, and Comparison of Internationalized Strings in Application Protocols > Authors : Peter Saint-Andre > Marc Blanchet > Filename : draft-ietf-precis-7564bis-09.txt Our area director pointed out to me offlist that the definition of "reasonable" is vague in the following text: Because of the order of operations specified here, applying the rules for any given PRECIS profile is not necessarily an idempotent procedure (e.g., under certain circumstances, such as when Unicode normalization form KC is used, performing Unicode normalization after case mapping can still yield uppercase characters for certain code points). Therefore, an implementation SHOULD apply the rules repeatedly until the output string is stable; if the output string does not stabilize within a reasonable number of iterations, the implementation SHOULD terminate application of the rules and reject the input string as invalid. What do implementers think is a "reasonable number of iterations"? My sense is that we're talking about at most 4 or 5, and usually 2 or 3. Peter From nobody Wed Jul 19 21:45:41 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: precis@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: precis@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AAB5E12EC51 for ; Wed, 19 Jul 2017 21:45:39 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.701 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.701 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=samwhited.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id txHkV0LKB-UZ for ; Wed, 19 Jul 2017 21:45:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-yw0-x236.google.com (mail-yw0-x236.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4002:c05::236]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4F1E6126D85 for ; Wed, 19 Jul 2017 21:45:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-yw0-x236.google.com with SMTP id x6so1451558ywd.1 for ; Wed, 19 Jul 2017 21:45:38 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=samwhited.com; s=swgoo; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=aTeM8uLkJMGr5eOWp/GVTcxUT23JsvZzErO8Mchn9WQ=; b=gBDHdcoIrw0RIvptFCBEcxh8gv4jTLDhDnmvu3Tgj78ctuqRvUjAaQkPQqNIwHsW3t CXdaX2j1DG4IxgQUpzIykoYvcNFtQYDnEQwkxM+BZI7qC/IqRM9HpFvBu8NH+nluNSVY AyI9In2IAqNMjAey3PACh0FwmQXKlz5kUUEzg= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=aTeM8uLkJMGr5eOWp/GVTcxUT23JsvZzErO8Mchn9WQ=; b=K+PnAKNRzIxPOS05Q4pAiUGHdA8ig48sF0NuPcxET8GjhBklrceRe4feapzgbNhP2Z 2bV330XQVVdm+K32f07PfbmHbFoWipJb+NeK75E0NVqEmmlSGiFBBN1cwwngYLM9gSqR DhvywkcXCqiY+fMW3ioUhQIy23SwvTgvyCD0U54pb0crtrqwXjUFGACdtaOekB96bYrS vRlnXDC4dRUGxtQNLIIXXQOAE1xHQiHBrw+LihMjIvimjjNz261B3/OjMYKg7zla9DuQ Lq4YJ5M2/QDteCCbbStErp+ScapGgewE6n9X4Ie8ApxVOYyCLFTxSDfyO5QOKSy4j0Wh AUkA== X-Gm-Message-State: AIVw111j25jzywBYN84Q5C5rgimmfVGlncl45hODq4+GL3ZfmWwZ5Xwt 3TlmjM2BSojLjlptQfllPRC9HxjYQnAdFsg= X-Received: by 10.13.223.133 with SMTP id i127mr2041642ywe.452.1500525937341; Wed, 19 Jul 2017 21:45:37 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.129.112.16 with HTTP; Wed, 19 Jul 2017 21:44:56 -0700 (PDT) X-Originating-IP: [2605:a601:1167:d300:1455:9f38:5fe6:12ef] In-Reply-To: <33f7468c-6742-7cbe-fa6f-70002c35cc62@stpeter.im> References: <150024725625.303.17137036571104960991@ietfa.amsl.com> <33f7468c-6742-7cbe-fa6f-70002c35cc62@stpeter.im> From: Sam Whited Date: Wed, 19 Jul 2017 23:44:56 -0500 Message-ID: To: Peter Saint-Andre Cc: precis@ietf.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Archived-At: Subject: Re: [precis] I-D Action: draft-ietf-precis-7564bis-09.txt X-BeenThere: precis@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: Preparation and Comparison of Internationalized Strings List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 20 Jul 2017 04:45:40 -0000 On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 8:40 PM, Peter Saint-Andre wro= te: > What do implementers think is a "reasonable number of iterations"? My > sense is that we're talking about at most 4 or 5, and usually 2 or 3. For now we've avoided dealing with this in the Go implementation by documenting that the nickname profile (which I think is the only profile to suffer from this right now?) is not idempotent and passing the requirement to iterate on to the users (application developers using the library). However, I suspect many of them will not read the warning in the docs and will apply the profile once, which may be a security concern. Because we can't be absolutely sure (or can we?) that a string will stabilize after any given number of iterations or that the number of required iterations won't change in the future as new characters are added, and because this introduces a tradeoff that must be made between performance and correctness, I think that idempotency should be a requirement for all standardized PRECIS profiles. However, I understand that this is a large change that may not be possible to make this late in the game. I don't think we'll special case the nickname profile to to make it run multiple times in our implementation, but I'm also not sure what we'll end up doing. It may be that we roll our own profile for nicknames and break compatibility with other libraries (although this is obviously not desired), or we may not support the nickname profile at all and leave it up to application developers to implement if they need it, or we may simply leave a big scary warning in the documentation. None of the options sound appealing. =E2=80=94Sam From nobody Wed Jul 19 22:31:01 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: precis@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: precis@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A0B5F12783A for ; Wed, 19 Jul 2017 22:30:59 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.7 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id YATYjXHWcCao for ; Wed, 19 Jul 2017 22:30:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-it0-x22c.google.com (mail-it0-x22c.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c0b::22c]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 28BD5126B6E for ; Wed, 19 Jul 2017 22:30:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-it0-x22c.google.com with SMTP id h199so10863548ith.1 for ; Wed, 19 Jul 2017 22:30:58 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=r5j91jHlJjWVEMmtoX6IhLNq1zrl3OJQZxpzPdQQFQU=; b=XJnCLg8B6vYwCpSdS93YGFzuEzDQAeHppS3rPsvA+4RQhF8dJrzPc1xgXH0M4oPv4v 7x9km2pD8nkcQJFGXwVM6du5QuzD8d9bh+Pv2f7ONbQXEV/webm3k6UxH8b4FJA7LVm6 5JFsOePeCbpl1he+zR0Y44nkTNnn8J/rmxFZV6VT56qfRRYpw4JLQ29auhXTQ2uW+3fR 3ssGOH+R3qXxo+yvBfB9zo994BLv+86R6K49T7zb0BnboBfHSd5urW57LuKPtdDvuZ5F rkZSpB6FCvZdR0ByCfTj8K668LJEO7oCi8aelgqgMfwiGVrkPDFGruyYOw03iDHHlrcz LX3w== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=r5j91jHlJjWVEMmtoX6IhLNq1zrl3OJQZxpzPdQQFQU=; b=MYXO9tYDFFZgm3g7B3sy30BnTx/wHQdQec+T/dX7yiXpaQiFsXIpTiA0+gJQq9s8wG YOZgWGmYzy1zcp8vSzQdWvBT/mnJSUVUvpxby2sC3c2hQ56LoeN+tFGMtib4dpKDh2P1 D9/3FX/2WajhQ5M2W7CKd+TU2hEg+JPSPeAccsRmrFpA8ObaprVntleOLmtsiiI9pp2u J4ddcYgZomkxdfskYfYHO6idHKEVtiXiHL4ntAZr+yMfc38+++yVVtPGqMrulm6apH2a RxG8LnVF82DieKhsJKt/vSIvwxcFFSOTWKJ9dUaxe87efCXO3k4se6i4H2+Mx5Uu1Zbo JlWQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AIVw110kTM9IYe3TF5YvYo66W180hGZlpUASufSniSoQ21MzkksQVuw7 MhDMI/S2ote1Exl+NE40I4R2wWbyBMe+AGc= X-Received: by 10.36.36.131 with SMTP id f125mr2191038ita.37.1500528657470; Wed, 19 Jul 2017 22:30:57 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.107.9.208 with HTTP; Wed, 19 Jul 2017 22:30:56 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <33f7468c-6742-7cbe-fa6f-70002c35cc62@stpeter.im> References: <150024725625.303.17137036571104960991@ietfa.amsl.com> <33f7468c-6742-7cbe-fa6f-70002c35cc62@stpeter.im> From: William Fisher Date: Wed, 19 Jul 2017 22:30:56 -0700 Message-ID: To: Peter Saint-Andre Cc: precis@ietf.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Archived-At: Subject: Re: [precis] I-D Action: draft-ietf-precis-7564bis-09.txt X-BeenThere: precis@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: Preparation and Comparison of Internationalized Strings List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 20 Jul 2017 05:31:00 -0000 > What do implementers think is a "reasonable number of iterations"? My > sense is that we're talking about at most 4 or 5, and usually 2 or 3. I interpreted the word "iteration" to mean "reapplication" of the rules; not counting the first application. The Nickname test cases become stable after 2 iterations of the rules. output1 = precis_encode(input) output2 = precis_encode(output1) # iteration 1 output3 = precis_encode(output2) # iteration 2 confirms that output3 == output2 I can't come up with a Nickname test case that requires more than 2 iterations to become stable, but that doesn't mean they don't exist. It's possible that a new PRECIS profile could be defined that has stability issues. IMO, if a PRECIS profile isn't stable after 3 iterations, it's broken. The last sentence might read like this: Therefore, an implementation SHOULD reapply the rules repeatedly until the output string is stable; if the output string does not stabilize after three iterations, the implementation SHOULD reject the input string as invalid. In the worst case, this means that you are calling precis_encode() four times for an input string. -Bill On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 6:40 PM, Peter Saint-Andre wrote: > On 7/16/17 5:20 PM, internet-drafts@ietf.org wrote: >> >> A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. >> This draft is a work item of the Preparation and Comparison of Internationalized Strings of the IETF. >> >> Title : PRECIS Framework: Preparation, Enforcement, and Comparison of Internationalized Strings in Application Protocols >> Authors : Peter Saint-Andre >> Marc Blanchet >> Filename : draft-ietf-precis-7564bis-09.txt > > Our area director pointed out to me offlist that the definition of > "reasonable" is vague in the following text: > > Because of the order of operations specified here, applying the rules > for any given PRECIS profile is not necessarily an idempotent > procedure (e.g., under certain circumstances, such as when Unicode > normalization form KC is used, performing Unicode normalization after > case mapping can still yield uppercase characters for certain code > points). Therefore, an implementation SHOULD apply the rules > repeatedly until the output string is stable; if the output string > does not stabilize within a reasonable number of iterations, the > implementation SHOULD terminate application of the rules and reject > the input string as invalid. From nobody Thu Jul 20 20:08:19 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: precis@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: precis@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C18BF131D38 for ; Thu, 20 Jul 2017 20:08:17 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.72 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.72 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=stpeter.im header.b=HtVnRCyS; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.b=fhZwY1h1 Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 8fcVHotTITwY for ; Thu, 20 Jul 2017 20:08:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from out1-smtp.messagingengine.com (out1-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.25]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 16497131D37 for ; Thu, 20 Jul 2017 20:08:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: from compute2.internal (compute2.nyi.internal [10.202.2.42]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4BD2B2094E; Thu, 20 Jul 2017 23:08:15 -0400 (EDT) Received: from frontend1 ([10.202.2.160]) by compute2.internal (MEProxy); Thu, 20 Jul 2017 23:08:15 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=stpeter.im; h=cc :content-transfer-encoding:content-type:date:from:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:subject:to:x-me-sender :x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc:x-sasl-enc; s=fm1; bh=woL52qTaeiXP+shwOe zv0P4If/3ZoJtv95qFFPabc1I=; b=HtVnRCySIp5Ujuxi0DgLflZJZ5IceKpBOw xwg05APZiqWkdVpNN2jn7dbO5J0dN33DetOtjcoXAC7PHK5gja56fQjnM7I/GxIV sq3owuoOkEgTdZbdApLcfkHxejQnVveGzhTeiUoPRF/RRDJRHHTgDttwSUnBzVjy 8NgkFmYbns+ELQ1CmU1IWQMzw0x1jqh1wh30B5uCRj4pIKvoUbewvOHucBaQ1rct dYjdaGRR7Jq3wYU91aUor6YnMUiXsAMC2vWv2aJptvtz2MvDjM/z5+hT7CEZK2SI 4FYMbki5jbLfmf5YyOHYNkJ3QHp5+o/qUEHOXMAWVzDH3oEC92zA== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc:x-sasl-enc; s= fm1; bh=woL52qTaeiXP+shwOezv0P4If/3ZoJtv95qFFPabc1I=; b=fhZwY1h1 VCYx8DX38bWPmYIqI6uDW2WHCMEPlRI6eugNP346x2DojZ/6qgNcLKn20+BnYuM7 KL1n88L+Sjyffuap/a9leib79EDoCNB7sG2LiPhrNjFBMdgryFbZO9bkWB37i88C Tgc8bRh5fBPj+xt6emzXw2z8xUvFesNkPABOsNT2CGX/NwZ2kwvPGleyPz5V8Gp4 kt0gvcK77sw+EvkZXY/fc/aethEzkSuMPRLBLhhRhcHhfSw4zQJzH5BPBM+6Pv88 Ye+qBcbQW5eu66ehz/Ky723JEPGIfdfXzszZU3/WEid6pAI+KpoafXC9G2Ei35q0 CNymlfJMu3IT6A== X-ME-Sender: X-Sasl-enc: GuCqoRi2Vs3rQbmg2CkB1SSDcsTXX+VQdt9QIOk13ZYl 1500606495 Received: from aither.local (unknown [76.25.4.24]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 61E217E4EE; Thu, 20 Jul 2017 23:08:14 -0400 (EDT) To: William Fisher References: <150024725625.303.17137036571104960991@ietfa.amsl.com> <33f7468c-6742-7cbe-fa6f-70002c35cc62@stpeter.im> Cc: precis@ietf.org From: Peter Saint-Andre Message-ID: <8165b2ce-de2b-2298-c1da-fd0c25f6fd75@stpeter.im> Date: Thu, 20 Jul 2017 21:08:13 -0600 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.12; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Archived-At: Subject: Re: [precis] I-D Action: draft-ietf-precis-7564bis-09.txt X-BeenThere: precis@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: Preparation and Comparison of Internationalized Strings List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 21 Jul 2017 03:08:17 -0000 On 7/19/17 11:30 PM, William Fisher wrote: >> What do implementers think is a "reasonable number of iterations"? My >> sense is that we're talking about at most 4 or 5, and usually 2 or 3. > > I interpreted the word "iteration" to mean "reapplication" of the > rules; not counting the first application. The Nickname test cases > become stable after 2 iterations of the rules. > > output1 = precis_encode(input) > output2 = precis_encode(output1) # iteration 1 > output3 = precis_encode(output2) # iteration 2 confirms that > output3 == output2 > > I can't come up with a Nickname test case that requires more than 2 > iterations to become stable, but that doesn't mean they don't exist. As far as I can determine based on reviewing various code points, that's right. This _should_ be a function of the code points involved (i.e., how many steps a code point is from something more stable), not the profile. > It's possible that a new PRECIS profile could be defined that has > stability issues. IMO, if a PRECIS profile isn't stable after 3 > iterations, it's broken. Agreed. > The last sentence might read like this: > > Therefore, an implementation SHOULD reapply the rules > repeatedly until the output string is stable; if the output string > does not stabilize after three iterations, the > implementation SHOULD reject > the input string as invalid. > > In the worst case, this means that you are calling precis_encode() > four times for an input string. That seems reasonable. Peter > > -Bill > > > On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 6:40 PM, Peter Saint-Andre wrote: >> On 7/16/17 5:20 PM, internet-drafts@ietf.org wrote: >>> >>> A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. >>> This draft is a work item of the Preparation and Comparison of Internationalized Strings of the IETF. >>> >>> Title : PRECIS Framework: Preparation, Enforcement, and Comparison of Internationalized Strings in Application Protocols >>> Authors : Peter Saint-Andre >>> Marc Blanchet >>> Filename : draft-ietf-precis-7564bis-09.txt >> >> Our area director pointed out to me offlist that the definition of >> "reasonable" is vague in the following text: >> >> Because of the order of operations specified here, applying the rules >> for any given PRECIS profile is not necessarily an idempotent >> procedure (e.g., under certain circumstances, such as when Unicode >> normalization form KC is used, performing Unicode normalization after >> case mapping can still yield uppercase characters for certain code >> points). Therefore, an implementation SHOULD apply the rules >> repeatedly until the output string is stable; if the output string >> does not stabilize within a reasonable number of iterations, the >> implementation SHOULD terminate application of the rules and reject >> the input string as invalid. From nobody Mon Jul 24 17:44:35 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: precis@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: precis@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C30AE124BE8; Mon, 24 Jul 2017 17:44:26 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.721 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.721 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=stpeter.im header.b=X8vMmP0B; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.b=qwxQN1Ge Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id jTGpo1zdLqQN; Mon, 24 Jul 2017 17:44:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: from out1-smtp.messagingengine.com (out1-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.25]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6D50012702E; Mon, 24 Jul 2017 17:44:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: from compute2.internal (compute2.nyi.internal [10.202.2.42]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id CF3A720738; Mon, 24 Jul 2017 20:44:24 -0400 (EDT) Received: from frontend1 ([10.202.2.160]) by compute2.internal (MEProxy); Mon, 24 Jul 2017 20:44:24 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=stpeter.im; h=cc :content-transfer-encoding:content-type:date:from:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:subject:to:x-me-sender :x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc:x-sasl-enc; s=fm1; bh=fMbdtLebw4uKtJn18C 4Pq5NXRjPtUL86ddql2j6u6ho=; b=X8vMmP0Bewi6IX3q60dt3picfLkh7RMtmv pCh3BdM7PknslE2Xe8euzzS68fs69Cg7b76FVBuf97FIm7V1zm4dHOWY+7S0rE0p DyZU1t7Jttbp5TicxR9sBaREe6bU3mUSIj25IWT7+jdswo3H3sIAFAVkyeFq/Trq t8uOnKVfK+dqvcF67gMjkPUmnxqG0VExDvj8IQB20Kn6wpF+l7kvLt9p2l1AaURM 84bXIkFppXH/I2Vb6nVIibJEL5JxbA/259xJZFswqFHVhFTSvWHYH56GJ7kbAgT1 TlfpelPCBTOar7IG/rM3DgybQDPWIoiLZlpYpphrQEvsZ1YuD8Yg== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc:x-sasl-enc; s= fm1; bh=fMbdtLebw4uKtJn18C4Pq5NXRjPtUL86ddql2j6u6ho=; b=qwxQN1Ge XYZHLwbhj+QTq1yMlzSsqJfxdNqy3U9eYkw0wTAAq+JeYgQnApZ4yQUBzvhLqKC6 CqpmKlt+fo0TPztpYjngrDLiqH0kkRsPn6VV4nR9SVp5xHIClB13+LHkR6uCqmkK k0rTyX7wFoKT+JY9xv6SULH6V0aZ76+o5jFn1HW1Cx0bg69MuoRt8k/mPOo+NO1o U8CqRfaF03sZHl1RpvZdk3B3FtIynOXhqR429VNc69bHX0X0tKNh6wpgXu6nDIpS cWgs83Mx+fxBduwM6AKWXUoBJEQq3v2lM87Jqa2K+/4Og72kPdAxLb+WaL92LQJw DGsZL7T+2s3New== X-ME-Sender: X-Sasl-enc: tQZWTRhGofIM/jxj/y+w8sEFk0T4Uc5Jkv9rO+qccfKI 1500943464 Received: from aither.local (unknown [76.25.4.24]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id E1F037E1D2; Mon, 24 Jul 2017 20:44:19 -0400 (EDT) To: Eric Rescorla , The IESG References: <149928511354.13530.16384868318840634986.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <030c786e-3697-08f9-2a27-75cf5e90cc68@stpeter.im> Cc: precis@ietf.org, draft-ietf-precis-7613bis@ietf.org, precis-chairs@ietf.org From: Peter Saint-Andre Message-ID: <30a6a884-6351-79e9-b476-5da23b743575@stpeter.im> Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2017 18:44:11 -0600 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.12; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <030c786e-3697-08f9-2a27-75cf5e90cc68@stpeter.im> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Archived-At: Subject: Re: [precis] Eric Rescorla's No Objection on draft-ietf-precis-7613bis-08: (with COMMENT) X-BeenThere: precis@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: Preparation and Comparison of Internationalized Strings List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2017 00:44:27 -0000 On 7/5/17 4:12 PM, Peter Saint-Andre wrote: > On 7/5/17 2:05 PM, Eric Rescorla wrote: >> Eric Rescorla has entered the following ballot position for >> draft-ietf-precis-7613bis-08: No Objection >> The use of "false positive" is confusing because positive can either mean >> "accept" or "reject". I would use "false accept" or "false reject" or some >> other clearer term > > That's a good suggestion - we'll incorporate that change in the > post-IESG revision. Ben Campbell noticed that I made this change in 7564bis but neglected to do so in 7613bis. I'll fix that and post a revised I-D. Peter From nobody Mon Jul 24 17:54:38 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: precis@ietf.org Delivered-To: precis@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AC9E7124BE8; Mon, 24 Jul 2017 17:54:29 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: internet-drafts@ietf.org To: Cc: precis@ietf.org X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.57.0 Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Precedence: bulk Message-ID: <150094406965.26199.8704494003318652242@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2017 17:54:29 -0700 Archived-At: Subject: [precis] I-D Action: draft-ietf-precis-7613bis-10.txt X-BeenThere: precis@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 List-Id: Preparation and Comparison of Internationalized Strings List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2017 00:54:30 -0000 A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the Preparation and Comparison of Internationalized Strings WG of the IETF. Title : Preparation, Enforcement, and Comparison of Internationalized Strings Representing Usernames and Passwords Authors : Peter Saint-Andre Alexey Melnikov Filename : draft-ietf-precis-7613bis-10.txt Pages : 27 Date : 2017-07-24 Abstract: This document describes updated methods for handling Unicode strings representing usernames and passwords. The previous approach was known as SASLprep (RFC 4013) and was based on stringprep (RFC 3454). The methods specified in this document provide a more sustainable approach to the handling of internationalized usernames and passwords. This document obsoletes RFC 7613. The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-precis-7613bis/ There are also htmlized versions available at: https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-precis-7613bis-10 https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-precis-7613bis-10 A diff from the previous version is available at: https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-precis-7613bis-10 Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org. Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ From nobody Tue Jul 25 16:40:53 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: precis@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: precis@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E66C51320C9 for ; Tue, 25 Jul 2017 16:40:51 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.721 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.721 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=stpeter.im header.b=cI5dEdKt; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.b=pGvHJLVs Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id jmZMgRk4utt8 for ; Tue, 25 Jul 2017 16:40:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from out1-smtp.messagingengine.com (out1-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.25]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D32071320C6 for ; Tue, 25 Jul 2017 16:40:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: from compute2.internal (compute2.nyi.internal [10.202.2.42]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 25719208CE; Tue, 25 Jul 2017 19:40:49 -0400 (EDT) Received: from frontend2 ([10.202.2.161]) by compute2.internal (MEProxy); Tue, 25 Jul 2017 19:40:49 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=stpeter.im; h=cc :content-transfer-encoding:content-type:date:from:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:subject:to:x-me-sender :x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc:x-sasl-enc; s=fm1; bh=hb2DHlIyOvrtoyoEyu 4rKVGDT7eExfO/Iae23kLXjT4=; b=cI5dEdKtnBVgo1Q8dJRxXbcic5pYsSEDUV oZxOvMT79tOdY0o+/8ijoXHDdzNMMOuqULTdZV6sVRK74BTO+TSODlMFQ8Il8RBy h1mwtFFz8oFW3WkebvZGYDLyHJt0XSl9St/vaSJAhY877Z2h+2O7A+iPbYCDqxfU Y6yMj/JosDnef/eVqFOiDDhyXFn87ay7cy0KiO8uq2Hb4OywQ72K5AMdzcjJOyOt vi55LH2IdskEbmN+iCvSzJc9TfTOo0NcjS5vETv7ASwgY10wsMOVa0EAZEE6D90X 9GhFGZ+4Tq6wSGgAaMIBxTubY9NLDnhI//6kntpZetC9o1u/Io2g== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc:x-sasl-enc; s= fm1; bh=hb2DHlIyOvrtoyoEyu4rKVGDT7eExfO/Iae23kLXjT4=; b=pGvHJLVs 3sBcZsU62bi/s4Bu8bu66ZjTTfbtGQjKXxvNZyhMVAZrRT2NwPEbo1VdwPjtg/Hi goWg7by8mu+ChOwZlToZO1ncu8k327giV4XxwYxNDT7KrHbn2lvS4XK4LvFcTqbd RIQ3bv+687u5tAT4EmY3c20ICDTUn3RhfFQSpTxXaIe1gZKVni/zH2LcpkEMY/Lj Hr2aHgTwPOsaG1MNovWDsrYNVuIU5an5ENr7wssTWHmINsSyCy/DvsrxgUMAOQZn nBeqWh/J6JlqcP7SaVxs/ihTlixB+dcBp2k17nRnnAkUsIOuvG60bCpsNCyY4kZN VXCLdbhmiCFvEQ== X-ME-Sender: X-Sasl-enc: Fv5cflIeMSCKMiVjrFhb6ioGl0HbM5ukqfhALhOvXglK 1501026048 Received: from aither.local (unknown [76.25.4.24]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 97666245BC; Tue, 25 Jul 2017 19:40:48 -0400 (EDT) To: William Fisher References: <150024725625.303.17137036571104960991@ietfa.amsl.com> <33f7468c-6742-7cbe-fa6f-70002c35cc62@stpeter.im> <8165b2ce-de2b-2298-c1da-fd0c25f6fd75@stpeter.im> Cc: precis@ietf.org From: Peter Saint-Andre Message-ID: <6e0d5c5e-bf53-5e22-e401-8108ce8767c1@stpeter.im> Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2017 17:40:46 -0600 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.12; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <8165b2ce-de2b-2298-c1da-fd0c25f6fd75@stpeter.im> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Archived-At: Subject: Re: [precis] I-D Action: draft-ietf-precis-7564bis-09.txt X-BeenThere: precis@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: Preparation and Comparison of Internationalized Strings List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2017 23:40:52 -0000 On 7/20/17 9:08 PM, Peter Saint-Andre wrote: > On 7/19/17 11:30 PM, William Fisher wrote: >>> What do implementers think is a "reasonable number of iterations"? My >>> sense is that we're talking about at most 4 or 5, and usually 2 or 3. >> >> I interpreted the word "iteration" to mean "reapplication" of the >> rules; not counting the first application. The Nickname test cases >> become stable after 2 iterations of the rules. >> >> output1 = precis_encode(input) >> output2 = precis_encode(output1) # iteration 1 >> output3 = precis_encode(output2) # iteration 2 confirms that >> output3 == output2 >> >> I can't come up with a Nickname test case that requires more than 2 >> iterations to become stable, but that doesn't mean they don't exist. > > As far as I can determine based on reviewing various code points, that's > right. This _should_ be a function of the code points involved (i.e., > how many steps a code point is from something more stable), not the profile. > >> It's possible that a new PRECIS profile could be defined that has >> stability issues. IMO, if a PRECIS profile isn't stable after 3 >> iterations, it's broken. > > Agreed. > >> The last sentence might read like this: >> >> Therefore, an implementation SHOULD reapply the rules >> repeatedly until the output string is stable; if the output string >> does not stabilize after three iterations, the >> implementation SHOULD reject >> the input string as invalid. >> >> In the worst case, this means that you are calling precis_encode() >> four times for an input string. > > That seems reasonable. All three of the PRECIS I-Ds have identical text on this point. Based on Bill's message, I propose that we change the sentence as follows: OLD an implementation SHOULD apply the rules repeatedly until the output string is stable; if the output string does not stabilize within a reasonable number of iterations, the implementation SHOULD terminate application of the rules and reject the input string as invalid. NEW an implementation SHOULD apply the rules repeatedly until the output string is stable; if the output string does not stabilize after reapplying the rules three (3) additional times, the implementation SHOULD terminate application of the rules and reject the input string as invalid. For the sake of traceability, I'll submit revised versions of all three I-Ds this evening. Peter From nobody Tue Jul 25 17:55:21 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: precis@ietf.org Delivered-To: precis@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A934413218F; Tue, 25 Jul 2017 17:55:10 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: internet-drafts@ietf.org To: Cc: precis@ietf.org X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.57.0 Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Precedence: bulk Message-ID: <150103050994.26365.3775884507302419461@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2017 17:55:10 -0700 Archived-At: Subject: [precis] I-D Action: draft-ietf-precis-7564bis-10.txt X-BeenThere: precis@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 List-Id: Preparation and Comparison of Internationalized Strings List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2017 00:55:11 -0000 A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the Preparation and Comparison of Internationalized Strings WG of the IETF. Title : PRECIS Framework: Preparation, Enforcement, and Comparison of Internationalized Strings in Application Protocols Authors : Peter Saint-Andre Marc Blanchet Filename : draft-ietf-precis-7564bis-10.txt Pages : 44 Date : 2017-07-25 Abstract: Application protocols using Unicode code points in protocol strings need to properly handle such strings in order to enforce internationalization rules for strings placed in various protocol slots (such as addresses and identifiers) and to perform valid comparison operations (e.g., for purposes of authentication or authorization). This document defines a framework enabling application protocols to perform the preparation, enforcement, and comparison of internationalized strings ("PRECIS") in a way that depends on the properties of Unicode code points and thus is more agile with respect to versions of Unicode. As a result, this framework provides a more sustainable approach to the handling of internationalized strings than the previous framework, known as Stringprep (RFC 3454). This document obsoletes RFC 7564. The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-precis-7564bis/ There are also htmlized versions available at: https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-precis-7564bis-10 https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-precis-7564bis-10 A diff from the previous version is available at: https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-precis-7564bis-10 Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org. Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ From nobody Tue Jul 25 17:55:43 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: precis@ietf.org Delivered-To: precis@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7527613219B; Tue, 25 Jul 2017 17:55:41 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: internet-drafts@ietf.org To: Cc: precis@ietf.org X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.57.0 Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Precedence: bulk Message-ID: <150103054144.26442.17235173776156331813@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2017 17:55:41 -0700 Archived-At: Subject: [precis] I-D Action: draft-ietf-precis-7613bis-11.txt X-BeenThere: precis@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 List-Id: Preparation and Comparison of Internationalized Strings List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2017 00:55:41 -0000 A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the Preparation and Comparison of Internationalized Strings WG of the IETF. Title : Preparation, Enforcement, and Comparison of Internationalized Strings Representing Usernames and Passwords Authors : Peter Saint-Andre Alexey Melnikov Filename : draft-ietf-precis-7613bis-11.txt Pages : 27 Date : 2017-07-25 Abstract: This document describes updated methods for handling Unicode strings representing usernames and passwords. The previous approach was known as SASLprep (RFC 4013) and was based on stringprep (RFC 3454). The methods specified in this document provide a more sustainable approach to the handling of internationalized usernames and passwords. This document obsoletes RFC 7613. The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-precis-7613bis/ There are also htmlized versions available at: https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-precis-7613bis-11 https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-precis-7613bis-11 A diff from the previous version is available at: https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-precis-7613bis-11 Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org. Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ From nobody Tue Jul 25 17:55:57 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: precis@ietf.org Delivered-To: precis@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DA9B31321A0; Tue, 25 Jul 2017 17:55:43 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: internet-drafts@ietf.org To: Cc: precis@ietf.org X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.57.0 Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Precedence: bulk Message-ID: <150103054385.26433.16205215773216620844@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2017 17:55:43 -0700 Archived-At: Subject: [precis] I-D Action: draft-ietf-precis-7700bis-10.txt X-BeenThere: precis@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 List-Id: Preparation and Comparison of Internationalized Strings List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2017 00:55:44 -0000 A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the Preparation and Comparison of Internationalized Strings WG of the IETF. Title : Preparation, Enforcement, and Comparison of Internationalized Strings Representing Nicknames Author : Peter Saint-Andre Filename : draft-ietf-precis-7700bis-10.txt Pages : 12 Date : 2017-07-25 Abstract: This document describes methods for handling Unicode strings representing memorable, human-friendly names (called "nicknames", "display names", or "petnames") for people, devices, accounts, websites, and other entities. This document obsoletes RFC 7700. The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-precis-7700bis/ There are also htmlized versions available at: https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-precis-7700bis-10 https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-precis-7700bis-10 A diff from the previous version is available at: https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-precis-7700bis-10 Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org. Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ From nobody Thu Jul 27 08:38:41 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: precis@ietf.org Delivered-To: precis@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 01958131CE6; Thu, 27 Jul 2017 08:38:40 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: The IESG To: "IETF-Announce" X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.57.0 Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Precedence: bulk Cc: ben@nostrum.com, The IESG , Marc Blanchet , precis@ietf.org, Marc.Blanchet@viagenie.ca, precis-chairs@ietf.org, draft-ietf-precis-7613bis@ietf.org, rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <150116991999.11603.14527770692076245720.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2017 08:38:39 -0700 Archived-At: Subject: [precis] Protocol Action: 'Preparation, Enforcement, and Comparison of Internationalized Strings Representing Usernames and Passwords' to Proposed Standard (draft-ietf-precis-7613bis-11.txt) X-BeenThere: precis@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 List-Id: Preparation and Comparison of Internationalized Strings List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2017 15:38:40 -0000 The IESG has approved the following document: - 'Preparation, Enforcement, and Comparison of Internationalized Strings Representing Usernames and Passwords' (draft-ietf-precis-7613bis-11.txt) as Proposed Standard This document is the product of the Preparation and Comparison of Internationalized Strings Working Group. The IESG contact persons are Adam Roach, Alexey Melnikov and Ben Campbell. A URL of this Internet Draft is: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-precis-7613bis/ Technical Summary This document is part of a set of revised RFCs (7564, 7613, 7700), based on implementation experience. 7564 is the base Precis protocol, 7613 and 7700 are profiles for specific use (username/passwords and nicknames respectively). This revised document, the Precis profile for username and passwords, essentially clarifies the original specification and make it synchronized with the revised base spec, specially regarding case mapping. Working Group Summary Multiple versions of the revised spec was discussed over more than a year in the working group mailing list. As a clarification of the original profile specification, there was no real contention on the document. A discussion happened on a desirable property of being idempotent, but the discussion went that this is a desirable property, not an absolute requirment. Document Quality RFC 7613 is referenced by a number of protocols heavily implemented and deployed protocols. It is reasonable to expect the same for this document. Personnel The document shepherd is Marc Blanchet. The responsible AD is Ben Campbell. From nobody Thu Jul 27 08:50:03 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: precis@ietf.org Delivered-To: precis@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6065B131CA5; Thu, 27 Jul 2017 08:49:44 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: The IESG To: "IETF-Announce" X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.57.0 Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Precedence: bulk Cc: The IESG , Marc Blanchet , precis@ietf.org, Marc.Blanchet@viagenie.ca, draft-ietf-precis-7564bis@ietf.org, precis-chairs@ietf.org, alexey.melnikov@isode.com, rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <150117058438.11612.15840019466793759384.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2017 08:49:44 -0700 Archived-At: Subject: [precis] Protocol Action: 'PRECIS Framework: Preparation, Enforcement, and Comparison of Internationalized Strings in Application Protocols' to Proposed Standard (draft-ietf-precis-7564bis-10.txt) X-BeenThere: precis@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 List-Id: Preparation and Comparison of Internationalized Strings List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2017 15:49:45 -0000 The IESG has approved the following document: - 'PRECIS Framework: Preparation, Enforcement, and Comparison of Internationalized Strings in Application Protocols' (draft-ietf-precis-7564bis-10.txt) as Proposed Standard This document is the product of the Preparation and Comparison of Internationalized Strings Working Group. The IESG contact persons are Adam Roach, Alexey Melnikov and Ben Campbell. A URL of this Internet Draft is: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-precis-7564bis/ Technical Summary Application protocols using Unicode code points in protocol strings need to properly handle such strings in order to enforce internationalization rules for strings placed in various protocol slots (such as addresses and identifiers) and to perform valid comparison operations (e.g., for purposes of authentication or authorization). This document defines a framework enabling application protocols to perform the preparation, enforcement, and comparison of internationalized strings ("PRECIS") in a way that depends on the properties of Unicode code points and thus is more agile with respect to versions of Unicode. As a result, this framework provides a more sustainable approach to the handling of internationalized strings than the previous framework, known as Stringprep (RFC 3454). This document obsoletes RFC 7564. Working Group Summary This document is part of a set of revised RFCs (7564, 7613, 7700), based on implementation experience. 7564 is the base Precis protocol, 7613 and 7700 are profiles for specific use (username/passwords and nicknames respectively). This revised document, the base Precis protocol, essentially clarifies the original specification, on topics such as case folding, normalization, code points, and rules. The only real modification of the specification is the change from Unicode toCaseFold() operation to toLowerCase(). Multiple versions of the revised spec was discussed over more than a year in the working group mailing list. As a clarification of the base specification, there was no real contention on the document. Document Quality The current version is based on implementor's feedback on RFC 7564. Personnel The document shepherd is Marc Blanchet. The responsible Area Director is Alexey Melnikov. From nobody Thu Jul 27 09:25:49 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: precis@ietf.org Delivered-To: precis@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7FEB1132046; Thu, 27 Jul 2017 09:25:38 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: The IESG To: "IETF-Announce" X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.57.0 Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Precedence: bulk Cc: draft-ietf-precis-7700bis@ietf.org, The IESG , Marc Blanchet , precis@ietf.org, Marc.Blanchet@viagenie.ca, precis-chairs@ietf.org, alexey.melnikov@isode.com, rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <150117273852.11520.3448336158289589728.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2017 09:25:38 -0700 Archived-At: Subject: [precis] Protocol Action: 'Preparation, Enforcement, and Comparison of Internationalized Strings Representing Nicknames' to Proposed Standard (draft-ietf-precis-7700bis-10.txt) X-BeenThere: precis@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 List-Id: Preparation and Comparison of Internationalized Strings List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2017 16:25:39 -0000 The IESG has approved the following document: - 'Preparation, Enforcement, and Comparison of Internationalized Strings Representing Nicknames' (draft-ietf-precis-7700bis-10.txt) as Proposed Standard This document is the product of the Preparation and Comparison of Internationalized Strings Working Group. The IESG contact persons are Adam Roach, Alexey Melnikov and Ben Campbell. A URL of this Internet Draft is: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-precis-7700bis/ Technical Summary This document describes methods for handling Unicode strings representing memorable, human-friendly names (called "nicknames", "display names", or "petnames") for people, devices, accounts, websites, and other entities. This document obsoletes RFC 7700. Working Group Summary This document is part of a set of revised RFCs (7564, 7613, 7700), based on implementation experience. 7564 is the base Precis protocol, 7613 and 7700 are profiles for specific use (username/passwords and nicknames respectively). This revised document, the Precis profile for nickname, essentially clarifies the original specification and make it synchronized with the revised base spec, specially regarding case mapping. Multiple versions of the revised spec was discussed over more than a year in the working group mailing list. As a clarification of the original profile specification, there was no real contention on the document. A discussion happened on a desirable property of being idempotent, but the discussion went that this is a desirable property, not an absolute requirement. Document Quality This version is based on implementor's feedback on RFC 7700. Personnel The document shepherd is Marc Blanchet. The responsible Area Director is Alexey Melnikov.