[radext] #172: i18n review for closure of NFC form
"radext issue tracker" <trac+radext@trac.tools.ietf.org> Mon, 04 November 2013 21:28 UTC
Return-Path: <trac+radext@trac.tools.ietf.org>
X-Original-To: radext@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: radext@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DC4B121F9F80 for <radext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 4 Nov 2013 13:28:36 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -101.038
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-101.038 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.739, BAYES_00=-2.599, MANGLED_NAIL=2.3, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id CDflhntbuemq for <radext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 4 Nov 2013 13:28:36 -0800 (PST)
Received: from grenache.tools.ietf.org (grenache.tools.ietf.org [IPv6:2a01:3f0:1:2::30]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5288D21F9F8E for <radext@ietf.org>; Mon, 4 Nov 2013 13:28:32 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:44172 helo=grenache.tools.ietf.org ident=www-data) by grenache.tools.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <trac+radext@trac.tools.ietf.org>) id 1VdRh8-00084e-Gt; Mon, 04 Nov 2013 22:28:22 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: radext issue tracker <trac+radext@trac.tools.ietf.org>
X-Trac-Version: 0.12.3
Precedence: bulk
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
X-Mailer: Trac 0.12.3, by Edgewall Software
To: draft-ietf-radext-nai@tools.ietf.org, aland@deployingradius.com
X-Trac-Project: radext
Date: Mon, 04 Nov 2013 21:28:22 -0000
X-URL: http://tools.ietf.org/radext/
X-Trac-Ticket-URL: http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/radext/trac/ticket/172
Message-ID: <066.1dd2c72add09d45cd42a88636fe81ada@trac.tools.ietf.org>
X-Trac-Ticket-ID: 172
X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 127.0.0.1
X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: draft-ietf-radext-nai@tools.ietf.org, aland@deployingradius.com, radext@ietf.org
X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: trac+radext@trac.tools.ietf.org
X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on grenache.tools.ietf.org); SAEximRunCond expanded to false
Resent-To: aland@freeradius.org
Resent-Message-Id: <20131104212833.5288D21F9F8E@ietfa.amsl.com>
Resent-Date: Mon, 04 Nov 2013 13:28:32 -0800
Resent-From: trac+radext@trac.tools.ietf.org
Cc: radext@ietf.org
Subject: [radext] #172: i18n review for closure of NFC form
X-BeenThere: radext@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Reply-To: radext@ietf.org
List-Id: RADIUS EXTensions working group discussion list <radext.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/radext>, <mailto:radext-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/radext>
List-Post: <mailto:radext@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:radext-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/radext>, <mailto:radext-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 04 Nov 2013 21:28:37 -0000
#172: i18n review for closure of NFC form Q: can the proxy normalize utf-8 to NFC? If so, under what circumstances? If not, what circumstances? The current assumption is: - if supplicant and proxy are same unicode version, YES, the proxy can always create NFC - if supplicant is NEWER unicode version than proxy, then MAYBE sometimes the proxy can create NFC. -- -------------------------------------+------------------------------------- Reporter: | Owner: draft-ietf-radext- aland@deployingradius.com | nai@tools.ietf.org Type: defect | Status: new Priority: major | Milestone: Component: nai | Version: Severity: - | Keywords: -------------------------------------+------------------------------------- Ticket URL: <http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/radext/trac/ticket/172> radext <http://tools.ietf.org/radext/>
- [radext] #172: i18n review for closure of NFC form radext issue tracker
- Re: [radext] #172: i18n review for closure of NFC… radext issue tracker
- Re: [radext] #172: i18n review for closure of NFC… radext issue tracker