Subject: WG Last Call: draft-ietf-sasl-saslprep-03

From: [email-masked] (Sam Hartman)
Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2003 13:08:55 -0400 (EDT)

This message initiates a SASL Working Group Last Call on the
document:

  Title:    SASLprep: Stringprep profile for user names and passwords
  Editor:   Kurt D. Zeilenga
  Filename: draft-ietf-sasl-saslprep-03.txt

The purpose of this WG Last Call is to ensure that the Working
Group has achieved consensus that the document is suitable for
publication as a Proposed Standard.

Please review the document for both technical and editorial
problems.  Technical issues should be discussed on this list.
Editorial issues may be sent to the document editor.

The Last Call period will close on Tuesday, October 7, 2003.

Upon completion of the last call, the WG chair(s) will take
action based upon the consensus of the WG.  Possible actions
include:

  1) recommending to the IETF Security Area Directors
     that the document, after possible editorial or
     other minor changes, be considered by the IESG
     for publication as a Standard Track RFC
     (which generally involves an IETF-wide Last Call); or

  2) requiring that outstanding issues be adequately
     addressed prior to further action (including,
     possibly, another WG Last Call).

Remember that it is our responsibility as Working Group members
to ensure the quality of our documents and of the Internet
Standards process.  So, please read and comment!

Kurt Zeilenga, SASL WG co-chair

---

From: Sam Hartman <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2003 14:08:51 -0400

Note that at the IETF 57 meeting, Kurt said he would release a new
version of the document with the tablese expanded.  He now believes
this would be wrong because the tables can be found in stringprep.

If people are OK with referring to stringprep for the tables, that's
fine.  However since this is a change from what we said we would do in
the minutes I wanted to explicitly call it to people's attention for
review.

---

From: "Kurt D. Zeilenga" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2003 13:13:57 -0700

Just to clarify...

When I made the comment at IETF#57 that I thought tables were
needed, I was in error.  I had confused an LDAPprep issue with
SASLprep.   LDAPprep contains statements such as:
   All other control code points (e.g., Cc) or code points with a
   control function (e.g., Cf) are mapped to nothing.
Providing a table in LDAPprep of these code points would be useful.

SASLprep, on the other hand, uses Stringprep tables.  For example,
  the "commonly mapped to nothing" characters [StringPrep, B.1] be
  mapped to nothing.

There is no need to add a table to SASLprep as Stringprep provides
one.  Since implementors of SASLprep must read Stringprep, duplicating
the information seems not only pointless, but might lead to problems
(such as if an error is made in the duplication).  So, I retract my
previous suggestion.

Those who think adding tables to SASLprep would be a good thing are,
of course, welcomed to present their arguments.

Kurt (SASLprep editor)

---

From: Sam Hartman <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2003 14:08:51 -0400

---

From: "Kurt D. Zeilenga" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2003 13:13:57 -0700

Just to clarify...

Kurt (SASLprep editor)