Re: [xmpp] [precis] WGLC Comments on 6122bis
"Ben Campbell" <ben@nostrum.com> Wed, 11 March 2015 01:11 UTC
Return-Path: <ben@nostrum.com>
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 B46F71A8782; Tue, 10 Mar 2015 18:11:40 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.91
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.91 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, 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 4siUjPK1fre6; Tue, 10 Mar 2015 18:11:39 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from nostrum.com (raven-v6.nostrum.com [IPv6:2001:470:d:1130::1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 680CB1A9124; Tue, 10 Mar 2015 18:11:39 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [10.0.1.23] (cpe-173-172-146-58.tx.res.rr.com [173.172.146.58]) (authenticated bits=0) by nostrum.com (8.15.1/8.14.9) with ESMTPSA id t2B1BQR3006260 (version=TLSv1 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Tue, 10 Mar 2015 20:11:36 -0500 (CDT) (envelope-from ben@nostrum.com)
X-Authentication-Warning: raven.nostrum.com: Host cpe-173-172-146-58.tx.res.rr.com [173.172.146.58] claimed to be [10.0.1.23]
From: Ben Campbell <ben@nostrum.com>
To: Peter Saint-Andre - &yet <peter@andyet.net>
Date: Tue, 10 Mar 2015 20:11:26 -0500
Message-ID: <7C5C961D-FB27-445B-909B-981A7B76447B@nostrum.com>
In-Reply-To: <EDF95EC2-720E-47C2-AD02-4CB2DA083DA5@nostrum.com>
References: <30D40A1D-09C3-4257-8DC1-A90AFE561571@nostrum.com> <F295A7BF-A037-4083-A8D2-FC0C55A03AE1@nostrum.com> <54FF7A98.4090600@andyet.net> <EDF95EC2-720E-47C2-AD02-4CB2DA083DA5@nostrum.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; format="flowed"
X-Mailer: MailMate (1.9r5066)
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/xmpp/TDXyhvftJvlPiB4Zks6McfiJ58I>
Cc: precis@ietf.org, XMPP Working Group <xmpp@ietf.org>, draft-ietf-xmpp-6122bis.all@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [xmpp] [precis] WGLC Comments on 6122bis
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, 11 Mar 2015 01:11:40 -0000
On 10 Mar 2015, at 19:51, Ben Campbell wrote: > -- 3.3, implementation note: >>>> >>>> Are there any practical consequences for the implementor? Are there >>>> potential conflicts where the XMPP implementation correctly forms a >>>> Localpart, but it contains an identifier that is interpreted >>>> incorrectly by some SASL mechanism? > > >> >> Re-using the UsernameCaseMapped profile from >> draft-ietf-precis-saslprepbis should help in this regard. However, as >> noted, some SASL mechanisms might not be upgraded quickly and thus >> would still use SASLprep (RFC 4013). The differences are explained a >> bit more in Appendix A of draft-ietf-precis-saslprepbis - as I see >> it, the only semi-major issue is that certain characters that were >> "mapped to nothing" in RFC 4013 are simply disallowed by the >> UsernameCaseMapped profile that we re-use in 6122bis. > > > So an identifier created with UsernameCaseMapped should be fine, but > an identifier created somewhere else in sasl might not be legal? That > _seems_ unlikely to be a problem... I realized shortly after sending this that that made no sense. It seems more likely that you would run into a previously created identifier that followed older rules--but you already discuss that in the intro. Even so, it still might not hurt to mention the appendix. > > It might not hurt to mention the saslprepbis appendix in the note.
- [xmpp] WGLC Comments on 6122bis Ben Campbell
- Re: [xmpp] WGLC Comments on 6122bis Ben Campbell
- Re: [xmpp] [precis] WGLC Comments on 6122bis Peter Saint-Andre - &yet
- Re: [xmpp] [precis] WGLC Comments on 6122bis Ben Campbell
- Re: [xmpp] [precis] WGLC Comments on 6122bis Ben Campbell
- Re: [xmpp] [precis] WGLC Comments on 6122bis Peter Saint-Andre - &yet
- Re: [xmpp] [precis] WGLC Comments on 6122bis Ben Campbell