Re: [Stox] Last Call: <draft-ietf-stox-core-07.txt> (Interworking between the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) and the Extensible Messaging and Presence Protocol (XMPP): Architecture, Addresses, and Error Handling) to Proposed Standard

Peter Saint-Andre <stpeter@stpeter.im> Mon, 09 December 2013 18:32 UTC

Return-Path: <stpeter@stpeter.im>
X-Original-To: stox@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: stox@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B5B011AE35B; Mon, 9 Dec 2013 10:32:08 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.703
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.703 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, GB_I_LETTER=-2, J_CHICKENPOX_12=0.6, J_CHICKENPOX_31=0.6, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
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 kzzn0EjxIZja; Mon, 9 Dec 2013 10:32:07 -0800 (PST)
Received: from stpeter.im (mailhost.stpeter.im [207.210.219.225]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EF5171AE057; Mon, 9 Dec 2013 10:32:06 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ergon.local (unknown [72.163.0.129]) (Authenticated sender: stpeter) by stpeter.im (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id B28284010C; Mon, 9 Dec 2013 11:32:01 -0700 (MST)
Message-ID: <52A60CA1.6040503@stpeter.im>
Date: Mon, 09 Dec 2013 11:32:01 -0700
From: Peter Saint-Andre <stpeter@stpeter.im>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.8; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.1.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Dave Cridland <dave@cridland.net>, "ietf@ietf.org Discussion" <ietf@ietf.org>
References: <20131127124920.17385.35362.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <CAKHUCzz4jYi9GVbPaHgM2PMAb3M1POryYCx2bdsqGcM4bE=hQQ@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAKHUCzz4jYi9GVbPaHgM2PMAb3M1POryYCx2bdsqGcM4bE=hQQ@mail.gmail.com>
X-Enigmail-Version: 1.6
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Cc: "stox@ietf.org" <stox@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Stox] Last Call: <draft-ietf-stox-core-07.txt> (Interworking between the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) and the Extensible Messaging and Presence Protocol (XMPP): Architecture, Addresses, and Error Handling) to Proposed Standard
X-BeenThere: stox@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: SIP-TO-XMPP Working Group discussion list <stox.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/stox>, <mailto:stox-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/stox/>
List-Post: <mailto:stox@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:stox-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/stox>, <mailto:stox-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 09 Dec 2013 18:32:08 -0000

On 12/9/13 6:53 AM, Dave Cridland wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 27, 2013 at 12:49 PM, The IESG <iesg-secretary@ietf.org
> <mailto:iesg-secretary@ietf.org>> wrote:
> 
> 
>     The IESG has received a request from the SIP-TO-XMPP WG (stox) to
>     consider the following document:
>     - 'Interworking between the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) and the
>        Extensible Messaging and Presence Protocol (XMPP): Architecture,
>        Addresses, and Error Handling'
>       <draft-ietf-stox-core-07.txt> as Proposed Standard
> 
> 
> A small nit - §5.5 contains:
> 
>     Several examples follow, illustrating steps 3, 5, and 8 described
>    above (the percent-encoded string "%C3%BC" and XML Notation string
>    "&#00FC;" both represent the Unicode character LATIN SMALL LETTER U
>    WITH DIAERESIS).
> 
> I don't think this is quite true. The percent-encoded string is an
> encoding of the codepoint U+FC as UTF-8, whereas the construct &#00FC;
> is an XML notation for the character - which crucially is not part of
> the address format, but simple how one could transmit the address over
> XML (including XMPP).

You sent a similar message to the STOX WG list about another I-D
produced by that WG, but I didn't grok your point until just now. I
think this text would be clearer:

###

      +----------------------------+--------------------------+
      | SIP URI                    |  XMPP Address            |
      +----------------------------+--------------------------+
      | sip:f%C3%BC@sip.example    |  f&#xFC;@sip.example     |
      | sip:o'malley@sip.example   |  o\27malley@sip.example  |
      | sip:foo@sip.example;gr=bar |  foo@sip.example/bar     |
      +----------------------------+--------------------------+

   In the first example, the string "%C3%BC" is a percent-encoded
   representation of the UTF-8-encoded Unicode character LATIN SMALL
   LETTER U WITH DIAERESIS (U+00FC), whereas the string "&#xFC;" is the
   same character shown for documentation purposes using the XML
   Notation defined in [RFC3987] (in XMPP it would be sent directly as a
   UTF-8-encoded Unicode character and not percent-encoded as in a SIP
   URI to comply with the URI syntax defined in [RFC3986]).

###

> The example given is actually tsch&#00FCss@xmpp.example - due to there
> being no terminating ";", I'd expect that to be taken literally by an
> XML parser, and not be treated as tschüss@xmpp.example as I suspect is
> desired.

That's a typo - the ';' is missing (and in fact the "00" is not needed
in accordance with the XML Notation from RFC 3987). Thus:

OLD
tsch&#00FCss@xmpp.example
NEW
tsch&#xFC;ss@xmpp.example

Peter

-- 
Peter Saint-Andre
https://stpeter.im/