-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 9/22/12 5:08 AM, "Martin J. Dürst" wrote: > On 2012/09/22 3:53, Peter Saint-Andre wrote: One further thought: > would it make sense to capture the fact that some new precis usages > obsolete a old stringprep profiles? > >> What does "obsoletes" mean here? Is the result still the same >> (just a different framework), or are changes to the definition >> allowed?
Good question. I mean "replaces" or "supersedes", where going forward the new Precis usage is intended to be used instead of the old Stringprep profile when handling the relevant protocol elements. For example, the Precis profiles we're defining in draft-ietf-xmpp-6122bis for XMPP localparts and resourceparts are intended to be used in the future instead of the Nodeprep and Resourceprep profiles of Stringprep first defined in RFC 3920. Although in the XMPP community we are working to make sure that the new Precis profiles have very similar output to the old Stringprep profiles (i.e., the same result using a different framework), I think any changes to the definition are a matter for the application protocol and not the Precis framework. Another way to handle this matter is to make sure that the application protocol specs contain an IANA action to change the status of the relevant Stringprep profile(s): http://www.iana.org/assignments/stringprep-profiles/stringprep-profiles.xml Peter - -- Peter Saint-Andre https://stpeter.im/ -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.18 (Darwin) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://www.enigmail.net/ iEYEARECAAYFAlBfQkUACgkQNL8k5A2w/vzGSACgtudyUwkQ48ssylX2LjC9OLja Oi8AoNG6xUGKCHBKnk2M1qNa4OckcQRl =QnFO -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _______________________________________________ precis mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/precis
