Re: [precis] I-D Action: draft-ietf-precis-7564bis-09.txt

Sam Whited <> Sun, 17 September 2017 19:13 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 060E0132F65 for <>; Sun, 17 Sep 2017 12:13:39 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.721
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: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.b=Tszuz5hP; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.b=o99i78Su
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id WA9wi9Qr5itF for <>; Sun, 17 Sep 2017 12:13:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5306013301F for <>; Sun, 17 Sep 2017 12:13:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from compute4.internal (compute4.nyi.internal []) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9E74E20A90; Sun, 17 Sep 2017 15:13:36 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from web3 ([]) by compute4.internal (MEProxy); Sun, 17 Sep 2017 15:13:36 -0400
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; 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; s=fm1; bh=OHwwScX6GH0wt8TyM 6BK5qIYZ123K45UsUCA8mwkyuc=; b=Tszuz5hPSgpbZ30veV2j88ib4oc0F+BnB 9IUNpimKFhfdGu1OrJwmbvZxYycz5ldXeonEhe9o8oaLWzbnqBilCe4GMOSJygjc 8oZeaggoW4PlBeL0o9inX7Yel0dVcyoqHLYRLeJTN72HqTLMaizJYcZN6BCqCGDO otJmN6TLuXzyCWIpjYW0oEt2hjGD3jj3Ycmtbtj7/EtP4OWjcc9pPTSCM6Bdy4Vr okAS+0ozP69fX42ckhpdrPVeHojPWbT1nxKIduIAQW1DJlifVbHq6Ax8q8WB4wYW Ujq0NtSt3ACOzo0vTd0lRZ65B8w09kUoF0IKQhaiGS6rNITWysCxg==
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=; 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; s=fm1; bh=OHwwSc X6GH0wt8TyM6BK5qIYZ123K45UsUCA8mwkyuc=; b=o99i78Su4e44ceezMey3rs He3AemwBys+X3M//t0QWeSWZ/UUeaNjRjWRF2zMpNOIBwM5d/p9iZVzZk1CG+Cw/ d27oI5njILMGB+I7LcvCUjEqpWvsfVzO0N7LKfAN1GTvyLu6O4DIdkKslCXsSamD Q2dXtShbXPLg9pl6TdAA24A2Y53tw+mDuAL00yotC8aZ/whnXqnK49Z7uAVEzAgt L9l5FKOvShfIJYwSJrvfES4ygJurKo2PgjVdywnM/y7kLGG9pfZ3H7e+BniaR/gf RZWsSwxcXA7RiVhJc6BVqI+cVRPSO3FR6GCqFsgT1qtp4J829AfwULXoZ3Xt3nkQ ==
X-ME-Sender: <xms:YMm-WbW7g9bny8aIZjExz6J9LOE7ne0Q6WGGw8f__ZvK0RXV0L4Xng>
Received: by mailuser.nyi.internal (Postfix, from userid 99) id 6D49D9EB1B; Sun, 17 Sep 2017 15:13:36 -0400 (EDT)
Message-Id: <>
From: Sam Whited <>
To: "Peter Saint-Andre" <>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
X-Mailer: Webmail Interface - ajax-64b08692
In-Reply-To: <>
References: <> <> <> <> <> <> <>
Date: Sun, 17 Sep 2017 14:13:36 -0500
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [precis] I-D Action: draft-ietf-precis-7564bis-09.txt
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, 17 Sep 2017 19:13:39 -0000

On Thu, Sep 14, 2017, at 21:04, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
> What needs fixing? We added explanatory text about idempotence, and
> there will also be an example of such in the RFC version.

That is not enough. Someone writing a PRECIS implementation *might* see
that. Someone actually using the PRECIS implementation (eg. the author
of an XMPP Client, Spotify, etc.) will most likely not see that. If
they're lucky, the text will have been copied over into the
implementations documentation. That's a lot of "if's".

> Please note that these documents are now in AUTH48 (very final edits
> before publication). So speak now or forever hold your peace!

I brought this up earlier as well. I wanted to bring it up again because
the Nickname profile is getting so close to being published again with
something that I think is possibly a security concern and that needs to
be fixed since we won't have this opportunity again.