idnits 2.17.1 draft-nemoto-precis-framework-implement-report-01.txt: Checking boilerplate required by RFC 5378 and the IETF Trust (see https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info): ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- No issues found here. Checking nits according to https://www.ietf.org/id-info/1id-guidelines.txt: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- No issues found here. Checking nits according to https://www.ietf.org/id-info/checklist : ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ** The abstract seems to contain references ([I-D.ietf-xmpp-6122bis], [I-D.ietf-precis-saslprepbis], [I-D.ietf-precis-framework], [I-D.ietf-precis-nickname]), which it shouldn't. Please replace those with straight textual mentions of the documents in question. ** The document seems to lack a both a reference to RFC 2119 and the recommended RFC 2119 boilerplate, even if it appears to use RFC 2119 keywords. RFC 2119 keyword, line 162: '...rs from "N" category MUST be mapped to...' RFC 2119 keyword, line 165: '...nd trailing whitespace MUST be removed...' RFC 2119 keyword, line 167: '...than one ASCII space character MUST be...' Miscellaneous warnings: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- == The copyright year in the IETF Trust and authors Copyright Line does not match the current year -- The document date (February 25, 2013) is 4049 days in the past. Is this intentional? Checking references for intended status: Informational ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- == Outdated reference: A later version (-23) exists of draft-ietf-precis-framework-06 == Outdated reference: A later version (-02) exists of draft-nemoto-idna2008-implementation-report-01 == Outdated reference: A later version (-18) exists of draft-ietf-precis-saslprepbis-00 == Outdated reference: A later version (-19) exists of draft-ietf-precis-nickname-05 == Outdated reference: A later version (-24) exists of draft-ietf-xmpp-6122bis-05 Summary: 2 errors (**), 0 flaws (~~), 6 warnings (==), 1 comment (--). Run idnits with the --verbose option for more detailed information about the items above. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2 Network Working Group T. NEMOTO 3 Internet-Draft Keio University 4 Intended status: Informational Y. YONEYA 5 Expires: August 29, 2013 JPRS 6 February 25, 2013 8 precis implementation report 9 draft-nemoto-precis-framework-implement-report-01 11 Abstract 13 This document reports implementation experience of precis framework 14 [I-D.ietf-precis-framework], for SASLprepbis 15 [I-D.ietf-precis-saslprepbis], Nickname [I-D.ietf-precis-nickname] 16 and XMPPbis [I-D.ietf-xmpp-6122bis], and findings from the 17 experience. 18 And this document further discusses considerations to implement 19 precis framework. 21 Status of this Memo 23 This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the 24 provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. 26 Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering 27 Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute 28 working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- 29 Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. 31 Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months 32 and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any 33 time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference 34 material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." 36 This Internet-Draft will expire on August 29, 2013. 38 Copyright Notice 40 Copyright (c) 2013 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the 41 document authors. All rights reserved. 43 This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal 44 Provisions Relating to IETF Documents 45 (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of 46 publication of this document. Please review these documents 47 carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect 48 to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must 49 include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of 50 the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as 51 described in the Simplified BSD License. 53 1. Introduction 55 This document is a report of implementation experience to evaluate 56 whether precis framework for each protocol can implement. 58 Some applications of IDNA2008 [RFC5890] [RFC5891] [RFC5892] [RFC5893] 59 [RFC5894] are expected to modified to precis framework. This 60 document reports to examine whether a implementation based on 61 IDNA2008 has useful processes and needs modifications for precis 62 framework. 64 In this document, two implementations based on precis framework are 65 described. The one is to evaluate the feasibility of implementation 66 for precis framework. This implementation is modified an application 67 of IDNA2008 to provide useful features such as normalization and 68 mappings for precis framework and some protocols. The other is 69 empirically to calculate precis' derived property value and to 70 generate idnabis-tables.xml is a like table based on precis framework 71 by using Unicode properties files. 73 And also some applications are expected to support some protocols. 74 If one precis framework implementation is for one protocol, there may 75 be duplications of processes in multiprotocols-adaptive applications. 76 To eliminate the waste of duplications and to be adapted flexibly for 77 multiprotocols, this document reports summary of common features with 78 and different individual features from precis framework's 79 recommendation in each protocol. 81 2. Experience 83 2.1. Purposes 85 Purposes of the implementations are following; 87 o To evaluate whether precis framework can implement. 89 o To examine whether applications based on IDNA2008 has useful 90 features and needs modifications for precis framework 91 implementations. 93 o To evaluate whether precis framework implementations for some 94 protocols have common features with and different individual 95 features from precis framework's recommendation. 97 2.2. Implementations 99 In this document, two implementations based on precis are described. 100 these implementations follow implementations of IDNA2008 101 [I-D.nemoto-idna2008-implementation-report]. 103 The one is modified application of IDNA2008 for precis framework. 104 The base application provides APIs for handling internationalized 105 domain names. This implementation is for providing mapping 106 SASLprepbis, Nickname and XMPPbis defined and strings validity check. 107 The implementation is to evaluate whether SASLprepbis as one of 108 precis framework's property can be implemented and to find out 109 whether applications based on IDNA2008 has useful features and needs 110 modifications for precis framework implementations. 112 The implementation can import tables of certain version of Unicode 113 properties and corresponding derived property value table for precis 114 is the same format as idnabis-tables.xml for codepoint validation. 116 The other is empirically to calculate precis' derived property value 117 and to generate idnabis-tables.xml is a like table based on precis 118 framework by using Unicode properties files. 120 3. Findings 122 Findings from implementation experience are following. 124 o SASLprepbis, Nickname and XMPPbis as one of precis framework's 125 property can implement individually. 127 o Applications based on IDNA2008 has useful processes are following. 129 * Some mapping features 130 Ex. Casemapping, nfc, width mapping, delimiter mapping 132 * Strings validity checking processes 133 Ex. For derived property value (As necessary, the file 134 describing derived property value table for precis should be 135 generated.) 136 Ex. For byte length 138 o Applications based on IDNA2008 needs modifications for precis 139 implementations are following. 141 * Mappings depend on each protocols defined mapping table. 142 Ex. Specilal mapping (Mapping to SPACE, Mapping to Nothitng) 144 * Checking whether strings are precis NameClass, FreeClass or 145 SubClass processes 147 4. Summary of implementation results 149 This section summarizes different protocol individual features from 150 and common features with precis framework's recommendation. And this 151 section lists useful processes from an application based on IDNA2008. 153 4.1. Individual features for SASLprepbis 155 o In passwords, non ASCII space characters are mapped to SPACE(U+ 156 0020) 158 4.2. Individual features for Nickname 160 o NFKC 162 o Non ASCII space characters from "N" category MUST be mapped to 163 SPACE(U+0020) 165 o Leading and trailing whitespace MUST be removed 167 o Interior sequences of more than one ASCII space character MUST be 168 mapped to a single ASCII space character 170 4.3. Individual features for XMPPbis 172 o Width mapping 174 4.4. Common features with precis framework's recommendation 176 o NFC 178 o Casemapping 180 o Additional mapping 182 o Bidi Rule 184 4.5. Useful processes from an IDNA2008 application 186 o NFC, NFKC 188 o Casemapping 190 o Width mapping 192 o Delimiter mapping 193 o Language based local mapping 195 o Bidi Rule 197 o Strings validity checking 199 5. Further Discussion 201 In this document, some applications are expected to use some 202 protocols and one precis framework implementation shuold be adapted 203 for multiprotocols. From this point, this section further discusses 204 open issues to implement precis framework. 206 o If one implementation supports precis NameClass and FreeClass, it 207 is necessary to be able to express these in one derived properties 208 table to eliminate the waste of duplications. And it's necessary 209 to define a format of a precis' derived properties table. 211 o From Section 4, each protocol has some similar individual 212 features(Ex: mapping to SPASE, mapping to nothitng, delimiter 213 mapping). It's necessary to generalize these features and prepare 214 some generalized features to be adapted flexibly for 215 multiprotocols. Followings are generalized features for precis 216 framework implementation. 218 * Mapping from one character to other character or nothitng 220 * Mapping from sequence that is more than one character to one 221 character 223 * Removing leading and trailing whitespace 225 * Disallowing additional prohibited characters that each protocol 226 defines as SubClass of precis framework individually 228 6. IANA Considerations 230 TBD. 232 7. Security Considerations 234 TBD. 236 8. Acknowledgment 238 TBD. 240 9. Normative references 242 [RFC5890] Klensin, J., "Internationalized Domain Names for 243 Applications (IDNA): Definitions and Document Framework", 244 RFC 5890, August 2010. 246 [RFC5891] Klensin, J., "Internationalized Domain Names in 247 Applications (IDNA): Protocol", RFC 5891, August 2010. 249 [RFC5892] Faltstrom, P., "The Unicode Code Points and 250 Internationalized Domain Names for Applications (IDNA)", 251 RFC 5892, August 2010. 253 [RFC5893] Alvestrand, H. and C. Karp, "Right-to-Left Scripts for 254 Internationalized Domain Names for Applications (IDNA)", 255 RFC 5893, August 2010. 257 [RFC5894] Klensin, J., "Internationalized Domain Names for 258 Applications (IDNA): Background, Explanation, and 259 Rationale", RFC 5894, August 2010. 261 [I-D.ietf-precis-framework] 262 Saint-Andre, P. and M. Blanchet, "PRECIS Framework: 263 Preparation and Comparison of Internationalized Strings in 264 Application Protocols", draft-ietf-precis-framework-06 265 (work in progress), September 2012. 267 [I-D.nemoto-idna2008-implementation-report] 268 NEMOTO, T. and Y. Yoneya, "IDNA2008 implementation 269 report", draft-nemoto-idna2008-implementation-report-01 270 (work in progress), August 2012. 272 [I-D.ietf-precis-saslprepbis] 273 Saint-Andre, P. and A. Melnikov, "Preparation and 274 Comparison of Internationalized Strings Representing 275 Simple User Names and Passwords", 276 draft-ietf-precis-saslprepbis-00 (work in progress), 277 February 2013. 279 [I-D.ietf-precis-nickname] 280 Saint-Andre, P., "Preparation and Comparison of 281 Nicknames", draft-ietf-precis-nickname-05 (work in 282 progress), November 2012. 284 [I-D.ietf-xmpp-6122bis] 285 Saint-Andre, P., "Extensible Messaging and Presence 286 Protocol (XMPP): Address Format", 287 draft-ietf-xmpp-6122bis-05 (work in progress), 288 November 2012. 290 Appendix A. Change Log 292 A.1. Changes since -00 294 o Modify document structure for developers of an application of 295 precis framework. 297 o Modify the Section 2 "Experience". 299 o Modify the Section 3 "Findings". 301 o Add the Section 4 "Summary of implementation results". 303 o Add the Section 5 "Further Discussion". 305 o Add the Appendix A "Change Log". 307 Authors' Addresses 309 Takahiro NEMOTO 310 Keio University 311 Graduate School of Media Design 312 4-1-1 Hiyoshi, Kohoku-ku 313 Yokohama, Kanagawa 223-8526 314 Japan 316 Phone: +81 45 564 2517 317 Email: t.nemo10@kmd.keio.ac.jp 319 Yoshiro YONEYA 320 JPRS 321 Chiyoda First Bldg. East 13F 322 3-8-1 Nishi-Kanda 323 Chiyoda-ku, Tokyo 101-0065 324 Japan 326 Phone: +81 3 5215 8451 327 Email: yoshiro.yoneya@jprs.co.jp