draft-ietf-precis-framework-21.txt   draft-ietf-precis-framework-22.txt 
PRECIS P. Saint-Andre PRECIS P. Saint-Andre
Internet-Draft &yet Internet-Draft &yet
Obsoletes: 3454 (if approved) M. Blanchet Obsoletes: 3454 (if approved) M. Blanchet
Intended status: Standards Track Viagenie Intended status: Standards Track Viagenie
Expires: June 13, 2015 December 10, 2014 Expires: August 9, 2015 February 5, 2015
PRECIS Framework: Preparation, Enforcement, and Comparison of PRECIS Framework: Preparation, Enforcement, and Comparison of
Internationalized Strings in Application Protocols Internationalized Strings in Application Protocols
draft-ietf-precis-framework-21 draft-ietf-precis-framework-22
Abstract Abstract
Application protocols using Unicode characters in protocol strings Application protocols using Unicode characters in protocol strings
need to properly handle such strings in order to enforce need to properly handle such strings in order to enforce
internationalization rules for strings placed in various protocol internationalization rules for strings placed in various protocol
slots (such as addresses and identifiers) and to perform valid slots (such as addresses and identifiers) and to perform valid
comparison operations (e.g., for purposes of authentication or comparison operations (e.g., for purposes of authentication or
authorization). This document defines a framework enabling authorization). This document defines a framework enabling
application protocols to perform the preparation, enforcement, and application protocols to perform the preparation, enforcement, and
skipping to change at page 1, line 44 skipping to change at page 1, line 44
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute
working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-
Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
This Internet-Draft will expire on June 13, 2015. This Internet-Draft will expire on August 9, 2015.
Copyright Notice Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2014 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the Copyright (c) 2015 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved. document authors. All rights reserved.
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
(http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
publication of this document. Please review these documents publication of this document. Please review these documents
carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must
include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
described in the Simplified BSD License. described in the Simplified BSD License.
Table of Contents Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
2. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 2. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
3. Preparation, Enforcement, and Comparison . . . . . . . . . . 6 3. Preparation, Enforcement, and Comparison . . . . . . . . . . 7
4. String Classes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 4. String Classes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
4.1. Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 4.1. Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
4.2. IdentifierClass . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 4.2. IdentifierClass . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
4.2.1. Valid . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 4.2.1. Valid . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
4.2.2. Contextual Rule Required . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 4.2.2. Contextual Rule Required . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
4.2.3. Disallowed . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 4.2.3. Disallowed . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
4.2.4. Unassigned . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 4.2.4. Unassigned . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
4.2.5. Examples . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 4.2.5. Examples . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
4.3. FreeformClass . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 4.3. FreeformClass . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
4.3.1. Valid . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 4.3.1. Valid . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
4.3.2. Contextual Rule Required . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 4.3.2. Contextual Rule Required . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
4.3.3. Disallowed . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 4.3.3. Disallowed . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
4.3.4. Unassigned . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 4.3.4. Unassigned . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
4.3.5. Examples . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 4.3.5. Examples . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
5. Profiles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 5. Profiles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
5.1. Profiles Must Not Be Multiplied Beyond Necessity . . . . 12 5.1. Profiles Must Not Be Multiplied Beyond Necessity . . . . 13
5.2. Rules . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 5.2. Rules . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
5.2.1. Width Mapping Rule . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 5.2.1. Width Mapping Rule . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
5.2.2. Additional Mapping Rule . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 5.2.2. Additional Mapping Rule . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
5.2.3. Case Mapping Rule . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 5.2.3. Case Mapping Rule . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
5.2.4. Normalization Rule . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 5.2.4. Normalization Rule . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
5.2.5. Directionality Rule . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 5.2.5. Directionality Rule . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
5.3. A Note about Spaces . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 5.3. A Note about Spaces . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
6. Applications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 6. Applications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
6.1. How to Use PRECIS in Applications . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 6.1. How to Use PRECIS in Applications . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
6.2. Further Excluded Characters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 6.2. Further Excluded Characters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
6.3. Building Application-Layer Constructs . . . . . . . . . . 17 6.3. Building Application-Layer Constructs . . . . . . . . . . 17
7. Order of Operations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 7. Order of Operations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
8. Code Point Properties . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 8. Code Point Properties . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
9. Category Definitions Used to Calculate Derived Property . . . 21 9. Category Definitions Used to Calculate Derived Property . . . 21
9.1. LetterDigits (A) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 9.1. LetterDigits (A) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
9.2. Unstable (B) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 9.2. Unstable (B) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
9.3. IgnorableProperties (C) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 9.3. IgnorableProperties (C) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
9.4. IgnorableBlocks (D) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 9.4. IgnorableBlocks (D) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
9.5. LDH (E) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 9.5. LDH (E) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
9.6. Exceptions (F) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 9.6. Exceptions (F) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
skipping to change at page 3, line 37 skipping to change at page 3, line 37
11.2. PRECIS Base Classes Registry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 11.2. PRECIS Base Classes Registry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
11.3. PRECIS Profiles Registry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 11.3. PRECIS Profiles Registry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
12. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 12. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
12.1. General Issues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 12.1. General Issues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
12.2. Use of the IdentifierClass . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 12.2. Use of the IdentifierClass . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
12.3. Use of the FreeformClass . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 12.3. Use of the FreeformClass . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
12.4. Local Character Set Issues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 12.4. Local Character Set Issues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
12.5. Visually Similar Characters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 12.5. Visually Similar Characters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
12.6. Security of Passwords . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31 12.6. Security of Passwords . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
13. Interoperability Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 13. Interoperability Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
14. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 13.1. Encoding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
14.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 13.2. Character Sets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
14.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 13.3. Unicode Versions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
14.3. URIs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36 13.4. Potential Changes to Handling of Certain Unicode Code
Appendix A. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36 Points . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 14. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
14.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
14.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
14.3. URIs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
Appendix A. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
1. Introduction 1. Introduction
Application protocols using Unicode characters [Unicode7.0] in Application protocols using Unicode characters [Unicode7.0] in
protocol strings need to properly handle such strings in order to protocol strings need to properly handle such strings in order to
enforce internationalization rules for strings placed in various enforce internationalization rules for strings placed in various
protocol slots (such as addresses and identifiers) and to perform protocol slots (such as addresses and identifiers) and to perform
valid comparison operations (e.g., for purposes of authentication or valid comparison operations (e.g., for purposes of authentication or
authorization). This document defines a framework enabling authorization). This document defines a framework enabling
application protocols to perform the preparation, enforcement, and application protocols to perform the preparation, enforcement, and
skipping to change at page 19, line 42 skipping to change at page 20, line 6
in others. In the remainder of this document, the abbreviated in others. In the remainder of this document, the abbreviated
term *_DIS is used, where * = (ID | FREE), i.e., either "FREE_DIS" term *_DIS is used, where * = (ID | FREE), i.e., either "FREE_DIS"
or "ID_DIS". In practice, the derived property FREE_DIS is not or "ID_DIS". In practice, the derived property FREE_DIS is not
used in this specification, since every FREE_DIS code point is used in this specification, since every FREE_DIS code point is
DISALLOWED. DISALLOWED.
UNASSIGNED Those code points that are not designated (i.e. are UNASSIGNED Those code points that are not designated (i.e. are
unassigned) in the Unicode Standard. unassigned) in the Unicode Standard.
The algorithm to calculate the value of the derived property is as The algorithm to calculate the value of the derived property is as
follows: follows (implementations MUST NOT modify the order of operations
within this algorithm, since doing so would cause inconsistent
results across implementations):
If .cp. .in. Exceptions Then Exceptions(cp); If .cp. .in. Exceptions Then Exceptions(cp);
Else If .cp. .in. BackwardCompatible Then BackwardCompatible(cp); Else If .cp. .in. BackwardCompatible Then BackwardCompatible(cp);
Else If .cp. .in. Unassigned Then UNASSIGNED; Else If .cp. .in. Unassigned Then UNASSIGNED;
Else If .cp. .in. ASCII7 Then PVALID; Else If .cp. .in. ASCII7 Then PVALID;
Else If .cp. .in. JoinControl Then CONTEXTJ; Else If .cp. .in. JoinControl Then CONTEXTJ;
Else If .cp. .in. OldHangulJamo Then DISALLOWED; Else If .cp. .in. OldHangulJamo Then DISALLOWED;
Else If .cp. .in. PrecisIgnorableProperties Then DISALLOWED; Else If .cp. .in. PrecisIgnorableProperties Then DISALLOWED;
Else If .cp. .in. Controls Then DISALLOWED; Else If .cp. .in. Controls Then DISALLOWED;
Else If .cp. .in. HasCompat Then ID_DIS or FREE_PVAL; Else If .cp. .in. HasCompat Then ID_DIS or FREE_PVAL;
skipping to change at page 21, line 42 skipping to change at page 21, line 44
for IDNA2008 and are referenced from [RFC5892] to ease the for IDNA2008 and are referenced from [RFC5892] to ease the
understanding of how PRECIS handles various characters. Some of understanding of how PRECIS handles various characters. Some of
these categories are reused in PRECIS and some of them are not; these categories are reused in PRECIS and some of them are not;
however, the lettering of categories is retained to prevent overlap however, the lettering of categories is retained to prevent overlap
and to ease implementation of both IDNA2008 and PRECIS in a single and to ease implementation of both IDNA2008 and PRECIS in a single
software application. The next eight categories (K-R) are specific software application. The next eight categories (K-R) are specific
to PRECIS. to PRECIS.
9.1. LetterDigits (A) 9.1. LetterDigits (A)
This category is defined in Secton 2.1 of [RFC5892] and is included This category is defined in Section 2.1 of [RFC5892] and is included
by reference for use in PRECIS. by reference for use in PRECIS.
9.2. Unstable (B) 9.2. Unstable (B)
This category is defined in Secton 2.2 of [RFC5892] but is not used This category is defined in Section 2.2 of [RFC5892]. However, it is
in PRECIS. not used in PRECIS.
9.3. IgnorableProperties (C) 9.3. IgnorableProperties (C)
This category is defined in Secton 2.3 of [RFC5892] but is not used This category is defined in Section 2.3 of [RFC5892]. However, it is
in PRECIS. not used in PRECIS.
Note: See the "PrecisIgnorableProperties (M)" category below for a Note: See the "PrecisIgnorableProperties (M)" category below for a
more inclusive category used in PRECIS identifiers. more inclusive category used in PRECIS identifiers.
9.4. IgnorableBlocks (D) 9.4. IgnorableBlocks (D)
This category is defined in Secton 2.4 of [RFC5892] but is not used This category is defined in Section 2.4 of [RFC5892]. However, it is
in PRECIS. not used in PRECIS.
9.5. LDH (E) 9.5. LDH (E)
This category is defined in Secton 2.5 of [RFC5892] but is not used This category is defined in Section 2.5 of [RFC5892]. However, it is
in PRECIS. not used in PRECIS.
Note: See the "ASCII7 (K)" category below for a more inclusive Note: See the "ASCII7 (K)" category below for a more inclusive
category used in PRECIS identifiers. category used in PRECIS identifiers.
9.6. Exceptions (F) 9.6. Exceptions (F)
This category is defined in Secton 2.6 of [RFC5892] and is included This category is defined in Section 2.6 of [RFC5892] and is included
by reference for use in PRECIS. by reference for use in PRECIS.
9.7. BackwardCompatible (G) 9.7. BackwardCompatible (G)
This category is defined in Secton 2.7 of [RFC5892] and is included This category is defined in Section 2.7 of [RFC5892] and is included
by reference for use in PRECIS. by reference for use in PRECIS.
Note: Management of this category is handled via the processes Note: Management of this category is handled via the processes
specified in [RFC5892]. At the time of this writing (and also at the specified in [RFC5892]. At the time of this writing (and also at the
time that RFC 5892 was published), this category consisted of the time that RFC 5892 was published), this category consisted of the
empty set; however, that is subject to change as described in RFC empty set; however, that is subject to change as described in RFC
5892. 5892.
9.8. JoinControl (H) 9.8. JoinControl (H)
This category is defined in Secton 2.8 of [RFC5892] and is included This category is defined in Section 2.8 of [RFC5892] and is included
by reference for use in PRECIS. by reference for use in PRECIS.
9.9. OldHangulJamo (I) 9.9. OldHangulJamo (I)
This category is defined in Secton 2.9 of [RFC5892] and is included This category is defined in Section 2.9 of [RFC5892] and is included
by reference for use in PRECIS. by reference for use in PRECIS.
9.10. Unassigned (J) 9.10. Unassigned (J)
This category is defined in Secton 2.10 of [RFC5892] and is included This category is defined in Section 2.10 of [RFC5892] and is included
by reference for use in PRECIS. by reference for use in PRECIS.
9.11. ASCII7 (K) 9.11. ASCII7 (K)
This PRECIS-specific category consists of all printable, non-space This PRECIS-specific category consists of all printable, non-space
characters from the 7-bit ASCII range. By applying this category, characters from the 7-bit ASCII range. By applying this category,
the algorithm specified under Section 8 exempts these characters from the algorithm specified under Section 8 exempts these characters from
other rules that might be applied during PRECIS processing, on the other rules that might be applied during PRECIS processing, on the
assumption that these code points are in such wide use that assumption that these code points are in such wide use that
disallowing them would be counter-productive. disallowing them would be counter-productive.
skipping to change at page 32, line 38 skipping to change at page 32, line 38
In protocols that provide passwords as input to a cryptographic In protocols that provide passwords as input to a cryptographic
algorithm such as a hash function, the client will need to perform algorithm such as a hash function, the client will need to perform
proper preparation of the password before applying the algorithm, proper preparation of the password before applying the algorithm,
since the password is not available to the server in plaintext form. since the password is not available to the server in plaintext form.
Further discussion of password handling can be found in Further discussion of password handling can be found in
[I-D.ietf-precis-saslprepbis]. [I-D.ietf-precis-saslprepbis].
13. Interoperability Considerations 13. Interoperability Considerations
13.1. Encoding
Although strings that are consumed in PRECIS-based application Although strings that are consumed in PRECIS-based application
protocols are often encoded using UTF-8 [RFC3629], the exact encoding protocols are often encoded using UTF-8 [RFC3629], the exact encoding
is a matter for the application protocol that uses PRECIS, not for is a matter for the application protocol that uses PRECIS, not for
the PRECIS framework. the PRECIS framework.
13.2. Character Sets
It is known that some existing systems are unable to support the full It is known that some existing systems are unable to support the full
Unicode character set, or even any characters outside the ASCII Unicode character set, or even any characters outside the ASCII
range. If two (or more) applications need to interoperate when range. If two (or more) applications need to interoperate when
exchanging data (e.g., for the purpose of authenticating a username exchanging data (e.g., for the purpose of authenticating a username
or password), they will naturally need to have in common at least one or password), they will naturally need to have in common at least one
coded character set (as defined by [RFC6365]). Establishing such a coded character set (as defined by [RFC6365]). Establishing such a
baseline is a matter for the application protocol that uses PRECIS, baseline is a matter for the application protocol that uses PRECIS,
not for the PRECIS framework. not for the PRECIS framework.
13.3. Unicode Versions
Changes to the properties of Unicode code points can occur as the Changes to the properties of Unicode code points can occur as the
Unicode Standard is modified from time to time. For example, three Unicode Standard is modified from time to time. For example, three
code points underwent changes in their GeneralCategory between code points underwent changes in their GeneralCategory between
Unicode 5.2 (current at the time IDNA2008 was originally published) Unicode 5.2 (current at the time IDNA2008 was originally published)
and Unicode 6.0, as described in [RFC6452]. Implementers might need and Unicode 6.0, as described in [RFC6452]. Implementers might need
to be aware that the treatment of these characters differs depending to be aware that the treatment of these characters differs depending
on which version of Unicode is available on the system that is using on which version of Unicode is available on the system that is using
IDNA2008 or PRECIS. Other such differences might arise between the IDNA2008 or PRECIS. Other such differences might arise between the
version of Unicode current at the time of this writing (7.0) and version of Unicode current at the time of this writing (7.0) and
future versions. future versions.
13.4. Potential Changes to Handling of Certain Unicode Code Points
As part of the review of Unicode 7.0 for IDNA, a question was raised
about a newly-added code point that led to a re-analysis of the
Normalization Rules used by IDNA and inherited by this document
(Section 5.2.4). Some of the general issues are described in
[IAB-Statement] and pursued in more detail in
[I-D.klensin-idna-5892upd-unicode70].
At the time of writing, these issues have yet to be settled.
However, implementers need to be aware that this specification is
likely to be updated in the future to address these issues. The
potential changes include:
o The range of characters in the LetterDigits category
(Section 4.2.1 and Section 9.1) might be narrowed.
o Some characters with special properties that are now allowed might
be excluded.
o More "Additional Mapping Rules" (Section 5.2.2) might be defined.
o Alternative normalization methods might be added.
Nevertheless, implementations and deployments that are sensitive to
the advice given in this specification are unlikely to run into
significant problems as a consequence of these issues or potential
changes - specifically the advice to use the more restrictive
IdentifierClass whenever possible, or if using the FreeformClass to
allow only a restricted set of characters, particularly avoiding
characters whose implications they do not actually understand.
14. References 14. References
14.1. Normative References 14.1. Normative References
[RFC20] Cerf, V., "ASCII format for network interchange", RFC 20, [RFC20] Cerf, V., "ASCII format for network interchange", RFC 20,
October 1969. October 1969.
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997. Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.
[RFC5198] Klensin, J. and M. Padlipsky, "Unicode Format for Network [RFC5198] Klensin, J. and M. Padlipsky, "Unicode Format for Network
Interchange", RFC 5198, March 2008. Interchange", RFC 5198, March 2008.
[Unicode7.0] [Unicode7.0]
The Unicode Consortium, "The Unicode Standard, Version The Unicode Consortium, "The Unicode Standard, Version
7.0.0", 2014, 7.0.0", 2014,
<http://www.unicode.org/versions/Unicode7.0.0/>. <http://www.unicode.org/versions/Unicode7.0.0/>.
14.2. Informative References 14.2. Informative References
[IAB-Statement]
Internet Architecture Board, "IAB Statement on Identifiers
and Unicode 7.0.0", January 2015, <https://www.iab.org/
documents/correspondence-reports-documents/2015-2/iab-
statement-on-identifiers-and-unicode-7-0-0/>.
[I-D.ietf-precis-mappings] [I-D.ietf-precis-mappings]
Yoneya, Y. and T. NEMOTO, "Mapping characters for PRECIS Yoneya, Y. and T. NEMOTO, "Mapping characters for PRECIS
classes", draft-ietf-precis-mappings-08 (work in classes", draft-ietf-precis-mappings-08 (work in
progress), June 2014. progress), June 2014.
[I-D.ietf-precis-nickname] [I-D.ietf-precis-nickname]
Saint-Andre, P., "Preparation and Comparison of Saint-Andre, P., "Preparation and Comparison of
Nicknames", draft-ietf-precis-nickname-13 (work in Nicknames", draft-ietf-precis-nickname-14 (work in
progress), November 2014. progress), December 2014.
[I-D.ietf-precis-saslprepbis] [I-D.ietf-precis-saslprepbis]
Saint-Andre, P. and A. Melnikov, "Username and Password Saint-Andre, P. and A. Melnikov, "Username and Password
Preparation Algorithms", draft-ietf-precis-saslprepbis-12 Preparation Algorithms", draft-ietf-precis-saslprepbis-13
(work in progress), December 2014. (work in progress), December 2014.
[I-D.ietf-xmpp-6122bis] [I-D.ietf-xmpp-6122bis]
Saint-Andre, P., "Extensible Messaging and Presence Saint-Andre, P., "Extensible Messaging and Presence
Protocol (XMPP): Address Format", draft-ietf-xmpp- Protocol (XMPP): Address Format", draft-ietf-xmpp-
6122bis-18 (work in progress), December 2014. 6122bis-18 (work in progress), December 2014.
[I-D.klensin-idna-5892upd-unicode70]
Klensin, J. and P. Faeltstroem, "IDNA Update for Unicode
7.0.0", draft-klensin-idna-5892upd-unicode70-03 (work in
progress), January 2015.
[RFC2865] Rigney, C., Willens, S., Rubens, A., and W. Simpson, [RFC2865] Rigney, C., Willens, S., Rubens, A., and W. Simpson,
"Remote Authentication Dial In User Service (RADIUS)", RFC "Remote Authentication Dial In User Service (RADIUS)", RFC
2865, June 2000. 2865, June 2000.
[RFC3454] Hoffman, P. and M. Blanchet, "Preparation of [RFC3454] Hoffman, P. and M. Blanchet, "Preparation of
Internationalized Strings ("stringprep")", RFC 3454, Internationalized Strings ("stringprep")", RFC 3454,
December 2002. December 2002.
[RFC3490] Faltstrom, P., Hoffman, P., and A. Costello, [RFC3490] Faltstrom, P., Hoffman, P., and A. Costello,
"Internationalizing Domain Names in Applications (IDNA)", "Internationalizing Domain Names in Applications (IDNA)",
 End of changes. 33 change blocks. 
37 lines changed or deleted 93 lines changed or added

This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.42. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/