Re: [xmpp] WGLC of draft-ietf-xmpp-6122bis-11
Peter Saint-Andre <stpeter@stpeter.im> Wed, 26 March 2014 01:27 UTC
Return-Path: <stpeter@stpeter.im>
X-Original-To: xmpp@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: xmpp@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3B9EE1A0028 for <xmpp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 25 Mar 2014 18:27:56 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.912
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.912 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] 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 4qyklcMlX3Ps for <xmpp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 25 Mar 2014 18:27:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from stpeter.im (mailhost.stpeter.im [207.210.219.225]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1001F1A0025 for <xmpp@ietf.org>; Tue, 25 Mar 2014 18:27:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from aither.local (unknown [24.8.184.175]) (Authenticated sender: stpeter) by stpeter.im (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 1130E4010C; Tue, 25 Mar 2014 19:27:51 -0600 (MDT)
Message-ID: <53322D17.80707@stpeter.im>
Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2014 19:27:51 -0600
From: Peter Saint-Andre <stpeter@stpeter.im>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.9; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.4.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Matt Miller <mamille2@cisco.com>, XMPP Working Group <xmpp@ietf.org>
References: <68FA58CE-C00A-4281-8B7E-5C96A0B3B835@nostrum.com> <35972936-21C6-4F35-92EF-4435C3F85C63@nostrum.com> <5331DFEC.4030900@cisco.com> <5331E42D.6020501@stpeter.im> <5331E64A.5080909@cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <5331E64A.5080909@cisco.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/xmpp/02uHmqXn2jvJU77ujDi2otrh40E
Subject: Re: [xmpp] WGLC of draft-ietf-xmpp-6122bis-11
X-BeenThere: xmpp@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: XMPP Working Group <xmpp.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/xmpp>, <mailto:xmpp-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/xmpp/>
List-Post: <mailto:xmpp@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:xmpp-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/xmpp>, <mailto:xmpp-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2014 01:27:56 -0000
On 3/25/14, 2:25 PM, Matt Miller wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA512 > > On 3/25/14, 2:16 PM, Peter Saint-Andre wrote: >> On 3/25/14, 1:58 PM, Matt Miller wrote: >>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA512 >>> >>> I've finished reviewing draft-ietf-xmpp-6122bis-11. I mostly >>> think this document is ready to be published. I think it deals >>> with the internationalization issues at hand as well as can be >>> expected. >>> >>> However, in 3.2. Domainpart, I wonder about the following: >>> >>> 4. So-called "additional mappings" MAY be applied to the >>> domainpart, such as those defined in [I-D.ietf-precis-mappings] >>> or [RFC5895]. >>> >>> As far as I can tell, just about all of the suggested mappings >>> from RFC5895 are already required here. But for any that are >>> not, I worry about the potential for interoperability problems if >>> say two servers communicating with each other apply different >>> mappings. It might be best to strike this bullet from the list. >> >> Yes, I think you are right that it would be best to remove this >> step. While updating draft-ietf-precis-saslprepbis last night, I >> removed any mention of additional mappings from the password >> algorithm, for similar reasons. >> >>> Less concerning to me is in 3.3. Localpart: >>> >>> 2. So-called "additional mappings" MAY be applied, such as >>> those defined in [I-D.ietf-precis-mappings]. >>> >>> I think there is less concern about interoperability problems >>> here, but I wonder if it is of any real utility. >> >> In saslprepbis, we've changed the username text to read: >> >> 3. So-called additional mappings MAY be applied, such as mapping >> of delimiters (e.g., characters such as '@', ':', '/', '+', and >> '-') and special handling of certain characters or classes of >> characters (e.g., mapping of non-ASCII spaces to ASCII space or >> mapping of control characters to nothing); the PRECIS mappings >> document [I-D.ietf-precis-mappings] describes such mappings in more >> detail. >> >> However, that kind of mapping doesn't apply to XMPP localparts >> because we profile the PRECIS IdentifierClass, which prohibits >> punctuation and space characters outside the ASCII7 range, control >> characters, etc. So IMHO it's unnecessary for localparts. >> > > Agreed. I looked at that text again and made a few changes (we're not mapping delimiters, we're mapping characters that are similar to delimiters): 3. So-called additional mappings MAY be applied, such as mapping of characters that are similar to common delimiters (such as '@', ':', '/', '+', '-', and '.', e.g., mapping of IDEOGRAPHIC FULL STOP (U+3002) to FULL STOP (U+002E)) and special handling of certain characters or classes of characters (e.g., mapping of non-ASCII spaces to ASCII space); the PRECIS mappings document [I-D.ietf-precis-mappings] describes such mappings in more detail. >>> The similar language in 3.4. Resourcepart is not concerning to me >>> at all; there are some cases where additional mappings are >>> desirable (e.g., MUC nicknames), and I think the language makes >>> it clear that anything beyond "it's opaque" is to be approached >>> with care. >> >> Agreed, although I'd change the bullet to mostly or entirely match >> what I added to draft-ietf-precis-saslprepbis. >> > > That works for me. Great. Thanks again for the review. Peter
- Re: [xmpp] WGLC of draft-ietf-xmpp-6122bis-11 Matt Miller
- [xmpp] WGLC of draft-ietf-xmpp-6122bis-11 Ben Campbell
- Re: [xmpp] WGLC of draft-ietf-xmpp-6122bis-11 Ben Campbell
- Re: [xmpp] WGLC of draft-ietf-xmpp-6122bis-11 Peter Saint-Andre
- Re: [xmpp] WGLC of draft-ietf-xmpp-6122bis-11 Matt Miller
- Re: [xmpp] WGLC of draft-ietf-xmpp-6122bis-11 Peter Saint-Andre
- Re: [xmpp] WGLC of draft-ietf-xmpp-6122bis-11 Ben Campbell