PRECIS | P. Saint-Andre |
Internet-Draft | Cisco Systems, Inc. |
Intended status: Standards Track | October 8, 2012 |
Expires: April 09, 2013 |
Preparation and Comparison of Nicknames
draft-ietf-precis-nickname-03
This document describes how to prepare and compare Unicode strings representing nicknames, primarily as used within textual chatrooms. This profile is intended to be used by messaging and text conferencing technologies such as the Extensible Messaging and Presence Protocol (XMPP), the Message Session Relay Protocol (MSRP), and Centralized Conferencing (XCON).
This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- Drafts is at http:/⁠/⁠datatracker.ietf.org/⁠drafts/⁠current/⁠.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
This Internet-Draft will expire on April 09, 2013.
Copyright (c) 2012 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the document authors. All rights reserved.
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal Provisions Relating to IETF Documents (http:/⁠/⁠trustee.ietf.org/⁠license-⁠info) in effect on the date of publication of this document. Please review these documents carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as described in the Simplified BSD License.
Technologies for textual chatrooms customarily enable participants to specify a nickname for use in the room; e.g., this is true of Internet Relay Chat [RFC2811] as well as multi-party chat technologies based on the Extensible Messaging and Presence Protocol (XMPP) [RFC6120] [XEP-0045], the Message Session Relay Protocol (MSRP) [RFC4975] [I-D.ietf-simple-chat], and Centralized Conferencing (XCON) [RFC5239] [I-D.boulton-xcon-session-chat]. Recent chatroom technologies also allow internationalized nicknames because they support characters from outside the ASCII range [RFC20], typically by means of the Unicode character set [UNICODE]. Although such nicknames tend to be used primarily for display purposes, they are sometimes used for programmatic purposes as well (e.g., kicking users or avoiding nickname conflicts).
To increase the likelihood that nicknames will work in ways that make sense for typical users throughout the world, this document defines rules for preparing and comparing internationalized nicknames.
Many important terms used in this document are defined in [I-D.ietf-precis-framework], [RFC6365], and [UNICODE].
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119 [RFC2119].
A nickname MUST consist only of Unicode code points that conform to the "FreeClass" base string class defined in [I-D.ietf-precis-framework].
For preparation purposes (most commonly, when a chatroom client generates a nickname from user input for inclusion as a protocol element that represents a "nickname slot"), an application MUST at a minimum ensure that the string conforms to the "FreeClass" base string class defined in [I-D.ietf-precis-framework]; however, it MAY in addition perform the normalization and mapping operations specified below for comparison purposes.
For comparison purposes (e.g., when a chatroom server determines if two nicknames are in conflict during the authorization process), an application MUST treat a nickname as follows, where the operations specified MUST be completed in the order shown (in particular, normalization MUST be performed before all other mapping steps and validity checks, consistent with [I-D.ietf-precis-framework]):
For both preparation and comparison, the "Bidi Rule" defined in [RFC5893] applies to the directionality of a nickname.
This specification defines only the PRECIS-based rules for handling of nicknames. It is the responsibility of application protocols such as MSRP, XCON, and XMPP to specify which entities are expected to enforce these rules (e.g., chat servers, chat clients, or both). Application protocols are also allowed to define application-specific rules governing use of nicknames in the relevant protocol slots (e.g., rules regarding the length of nicknames).
The security considerations described in [I-D.ietf-precis-framework] apply to the "FreeClass" base string class used in this document for nicknames.
The security considerations described in [UTR39] apply to the use of Unicode characters in nicknames.
Section 10.5 of [I-D.ietf-precis-framework] describes some of the security considerations related to visually similar characters, also called "confusable characters" or "confusables".
Although the mapping rules defined under Section 2 of this document are designed in part to reduce the possibility of confusion about nicknames, this document does not provide more detailed recommendations regarding the handling of visually similar characters, such as those in [UTR39].
The IANA shall add the following entry to the PRECIS Usage Registry:
Thanks to Mary Barnes, Dave Cridland, and Miguel Garcia for their feedback.
[I-D.ietf-precis-framework] | Saint-Andre, P and M Blanchet, "Precis Framework: Handling Internationalized Strings in Protocols", Internet-Draft draft-ietf-precis-framework-06, September 2012. |
[RFC2119] | Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997. |
[RFC5893] | Alvestrand, H. and C. Karp, "Right-to-Left Scripts for Internationalized Domain Names for Applications (IDNA)", RFC 5893, August 2010. |
[UNICODE] | The Unicode Consortium, "The Unicode Standard, Version 6.1", 2012. |
[UTR39] | The Unicode Consortium, "Unicode Technical Report #39: Unicode Security Mechanisms", August 2010. |