[Emu] Issue #18: Internationalization

["Joseph Salowey (jsalowey)" <jsalowey at cisco.com>]

#18: Internationalization

 Is the use of UTF-8 sufficient or is other tagging necessary.  The
 following cases need to be considered:

 1. Usernames and passwords
 2. Prompts and error associated with username and password
authentication
 3. Other textual data

 > Section 4.3.6
 >
 > "  The payload MAY provide a standard attribute format that supports
 >    international strings.  This attribute format MUST support
encoding
 >    strings in UTF-8 [RFC3629] format.  Any strings sent by the server
 >    intended for display to the user MUST be sent in UTF-8 format and
 >    SHOULD be able to be marked with language information and
 > adapted to
 >    the user's language preference."
 >
 > If UTF-8 is supported, is it necessary to also mark the language?
 > Why is language negotiation a SHOULD?
 >
 > EAP methods such as Identity & Notification don't support this.
 >

 and

 > Section 4.5.2
 >
 > "  The password authentication exchange MUST support user names and
 >    passwords in international languages.  It MUST support encoding of
 >    user name and password strings in UTF-8 [RFC3629] format.  Any
 >    strings sent by the server during the password exchange
 > and intended
 >    for display to the user MUST be sent in UTF-8 format and SHOULD be
 >    able to be marked with language information and adapted to
 > the user's
 >    language preference.
 > "
 > Why is it useful to mark usernames and passwords with
 > language information on the wire?

Comment:

In the Stockholm meeting it was suggested UTF-8 was sufficient, but
there did not appear to be consensus on this. 

-- 
Ticket URL: <http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/emu/trac/ticket/18>
emu <http://tools.ietf.org/wg/emu/>