Network Working Group P. Faltstrom, Ed.
Internet-Draft Cisco
Intended status: Standards Track P. Hoffman, Ed.
Expires: December 11, 2011 VPN Consortium
June 9, 2011
The Unicode code points and IDNA - Unicode 6.0
draft-faltstrom-5892bis-05.txt
Abstract
This memo documents IETF consensus for IDNA derived character
properties related to the three code points, existing in Unicode 5.2,
that changed property values when version 6.0 was released. The
consensus is that no update is needed to RFC 5892 based on the
changes made in Unicode 6.0.
Status of this Memo
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 December 11, 2011.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2011 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
Faltstrom & Hoffman Expires December 11, 2011 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft IDNA Codepoints June 2011
described in the Simplified BSD License.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
1.1. U+0CF1 KANNADA SIGN JIHVAMULIYA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
1.2. U+0CF2 KANNADA SIGN UPADHMANIYA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
1.3. U+19DA NEW TAI LUE THAM DIGIT ONE . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2. IETF Consensus . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
4. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
5. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
6. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
Faltstrom & Hoffman Expires December 11, 2011 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft IDNA Codepoints June 2011
1. Introduction
RFC 5892 [RFC5892] specifies an algorithm that was defined when
version 5.0 (later updated to version 5.2) [Unicode5.2] was the
current version of Unicode, and it also defines a derived property
value based on that algorithm. Unicode 6.0 [Unicode6] has changed
GeneralCategory of three code points that were allocated in Unicode
5.2 or earlier. This implies the derived property value differs
depending on whether the property definitions used are from Unicode
5.2 or 6.0. These are non-backward-compatible changes as described
in section 5.1 of RFC 5892.
The three code points are:
1.1. U+0CF1 KANNADA SIGN JIHVAMULIYA
The GeneralCategory for this character changes from So to Lo. This
implies that the derived property value changes from DISALLOWED to
PVALID.
1.2. U+0CF2 KANNADA SIGN UPADHMANIYA
The GeneralCategory for this character changes from So to Lo. This
implies that the derived property value changes from DISALLOWED to
PVALID.
1.3. U+19DA NEW TAI LUE THAM DIGIT ONE
The GeneralCategory for this character changes from Nd to No. This
implies that the derived property value changes from PVALID to
DISALLOWED.
2. IETF Consensus
No change to RFC 5892 is needed based on the changes made in Unicode
6.0.
This consensus does not imply that no changes will be made to RFC
5892 for all future updates of The Unicode Standard.
This RFC is being produced because 6.0 is the first version of
Unicode to be released since IDNA2008 was published.
3. IANA Considerations
IANA is to update the derived property value registry according to
Faltstrom & Hoffman Expires December 11, 2011 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft IDNA Codepoints June 2011
RFC 5892 and property values as defined in The Unicode Standard
version 6.0.
4. Security Considerations
When the algorithm presented in RFC 5892 is applied using the
property definitions of Unicode Standard Version 6.0, the result will
be different from when it is applied using the property definitions
of Unicode 5.2 for the three code points discussed in this document
in addition to the changes for code points being unassigned in
Unicode 5.2. The three code points are unlikely to occur in
internationalized domain names, however, so the security implications
of the changes are minor.
5. Acknowledgements
The main contributors are (in alphabetical order) Eric Brunner-
Williams, Vint Cerf, Tina Dam, Martin Duerst, John Klensin, Mark
Davis, Pete Resnick, Markus Scherer, Andrew Sullivan, Kenneth
Whistler and Nicholas Williams.
Not all contributors believe the solution for the issues discussed in
this document is optimal.
6. Normative References
[RFC5892] Faltstrom, P., "The Unicode Code Points and
Internationalized Domain Names for Applications (IDNA)",
RFC 5892, August 2010.
[Unicode5.2]
The Unicode Consortium, "The Unicode Standard, Version
5.2.0", Unicode 5.0.0, Boston, MA, Addison-Wesley ISBN
0-321-48091-0, as amended by Unicode 5.2.0
http://www.unicode.org/versions/Unicode5.2.0/, 2009,
<http://www.unicode.org/versions/Unicode5.2.0/>.
[Unicode6]
The Unicode Consortium, "The Unicode Standard, Version
6.0.0", October 2010.
Faltstrom & Hoffman Expires December 11, 2011 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft IDNA Codepoints June 2011
Authors' Addresses
Patrik Faltstrom (editor)
Cisco
Email: paf@cisco.com
Paul Hoffman (editor)
VPN Consortium
Email: paul.hoffman@vpnc.org
Faltstrom & Hoffman Expires December 11, 2011 [Page 5]
