Re: [apps-discuss] 回复: Re: AppsDir review of draft-ietf-nfsv4-rfc3530bis-25

S Moonesamy <> Wed, 08 May 2013 17:07 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 966C021F9375; Wed, 8 May 2013 10:07:37 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -100.177
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-100.177 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-2.423, BAYES_00=-2.599, CHARSET_FARAWAY_HEADER=3.2, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, SARE_SUB_ENC_GB2312=1.345, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id R01YuYEnJIID; Wed, 8 May 2013 10:07:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2001:470:f329:1::1]) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2585F21F9335; Wed, 8 May 2013 10:07:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ([]) (authenticated bits=0) by (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id r48H6gFP011969 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Wed, 8 May 2013 10:06:52 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple;; s=mail2010; t=1368032816; bh=pHFwVH5WGUFKnlv2m6p/nX73q8qLaZ1gf/ulAo38N24=; h=Date:To:From:Subject:Cc:In-Reply-To:References; b=C8h9x2cV5AcBzTXWn+VrcHvUlFzNKbzm0flQdV5fbgoq7gg+MN7J+58cgS/RSWKMp hcP49/P4Zj3xxr5+qBrGn/YsFo2LnJq//nOkbEFgBU0g4P8SOibxxg44igSXKc0QiT 9GuYKcfTE8QcVRvZOybOZgFnvFI6SIS+wJI0+xL4=
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple;; s=mail; t=1368032816;; bh=pHFwVH5WGUFKnlv2m6p/nX73q8qLaZ1gf/ulAo38N24=; h=Date:To:From:Subject:Cc:In-Reply-To:References; b=QgYQ0ip7PBFfGl0IBTo++xsZt+6wtozqIYWzy+VZYWvoIoUg7GLq+QEm9I/9gFA+W 5KFquYHQbXaBLYUSeF/BbBmIGdiqW2mptU4OiSyZ8y9+LaE5M6VqZizmnaQ+36pBPf yf7zcIIjfzZZWXrdGcO+2p37rWhgIyACCw8bM3vo=
Message-Id: <>
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version
Date: Wed, 08 May 2013 09:18:41 -0700
From: S Moonesamy <>
In-Reply-To: <>
References: <6E0E2EDBD7BF49FF94AD9DBA96C88E07@LENOVO47E041CF> <> <>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format="flowed"
Subject: Re: [apps-discuss] 回复: Re: AppsDir review of draft-ietf-nfsv4-rfc3530bis-25
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: General discussion of application-layer protocols <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 08 May 2013 17:07:37 -0000

At 23:20 07-05-2013, Jiankang Yao wrote:
>  thanks for your kind reply.
>Your suggested change is one way to improve this document.
>but I suggest you to ask more internationalization experts' comments 
>about this


>From: Haynes, Tom
>Date: 2013-05-08 12:23
>To: Jiankang YAO
>CC: ;
>Subject: Re: AppsDir review of draft-ietf-nfsv4-rfc3530bis-25
>Hi  Jiankang,
>I spoke with our internationalization expert and they describe that our use of
>stringprep is informative and as a guideline.
>As such, we will move the reference to no longer be normative and thus
>keep the document to refer to the existing version of UNICODE.

This is a comment and not expert advice.

RFC 6885 mentions that Stringprep is bound to Version 3.2 of Unicode 
and that protocols using it are stuck on that version.  I don't 
recall the status of the working group work.

 From Section 12.1.1:

   "NFSv4, while it does make normative references to stringprep and uses
    elements of that framework, it does not, for reasons that are
    explained below, conform to that framework, for all of the strings
    that are used within it."

It is unclear whether the use of stringprep is informative or 
normative.  Section 12 of the draft is well-written.  Some of the 
issues mentioned in that section have been raised during the IDNA 
discussions.  Section 12 would benefit from more review.

S. Moonesamy