Movatterモバイル変換


[0]ホーム

URL:


[RFC Home] [TEXT|PDF|HTML] [Tracker] [IPR] [Errata] [Info page]

Obsoleted by:8266 PROPOSED STANDARD
Errata Exist
Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF)                    P. Saint-AndreRequest for Comments: 7700                                          &yetCategory: Standards Track                                  December 2015ISSN: 2070-1721Preparation, Enforcement, and Comparison ofInternationalized Strings Representing NicknamesAbstract   This document describes methods for handling Unicode strings   representing memorable, human-friendly names (called "nicknames",   "display names", or "petnames") for people, devices, accounts,   websites, and other entities.Status of This Memo   This is an Internet Standards Track document.   This document is a product of the Internet Engineering Task Force   (IETF).  It represents the consensus of the IETF community.  It has   received public review and has been approved for publication by the   Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG).  Further information on   Internet Standards is available inSection 2 of RFC 5741.   Information about the current status of this document, any errata,   and how to provide feedback on it may be obtained athttp://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7700.Copyright Notice   Copyright (c) 2015 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the   document authors.  All rights reserved.   This document is subject toBCP 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.Saint-Andre                  Standards Track                    [Page 1]

RFC 7700                    PRECIS: Nickname               December 2015Table of Contents1. Introduction ....................................................21.1. Overview ...................................................21.2. Terminology ................................................32. Nickname Profile ................................................32.1. Rules ......................................................32.2. Preparation ................................................52.3. Enforcement ................................................52.4. Comparison .................................................53. Examples ........................................................54. Use in Application Protocols ....................................65. IANA Considerations .............................................76. Security Considerations .........................................86.1. Reuse of PRECIS ............................................86.2. Reuse of Unicode ...........................................86.3. Visually Similar Characters ................................87. References ......................................................87.1. Normative References .......................................87.2. Informative References .....................................9   Acknowledgements ..................................................11   Author's Address ..................................................111.  Introduction1.1.  Overview   A number of technologies and applications provide the ability for a   person to choose a memorable, human-friendly name in a communications   context, or to set such a name for another entity such as a device,   account, contact, or website.  Such names are variously called   "nicknames" (e.g., in chat room applications), "display names" (e.g.,   in Internet mail), or "petnames" (see [PETNAME-SYSTEMS]); for   consistency, these are all called "nicknames" in this document.   Nicknames are commonly supported in technologies for textual chat   rooms, e.g., Internet Relay Chat [RFC2811] and multi-party chat   technologies based on the Extensible Messaging and Presence Protocol   (XMPP) [RFC6120] [XEP-0045], the Message Session Relay Protocol   (MSRP) [RFC4975] [RFC7701], and Centralized Conferencing (XCON)   [RFC5239] [XCON-SYSTEM].  Recent chat room 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).Saint-Andre                  Standards Track                    [Page 2]

RFC 7700                    PRECIS: Nickname               December 2015   A similar usage enables a person to set their own preferred display   name or to set a preferred display name for another user (e.g., the   "display-name" construct in the Internet message format [RFC5322] and   [XEP-0172] in XMPP).   Memorable, human-friendly names are also used in contexts other than   personal messaging, such as names for devices (e.g., in a network   visualization application), websites (e.g., for bookmarks in a web   browser), accounts (e.g., in a web interface for a list of payees in   a bank account), people (e.g., in a contact list application), and   the like.   The rules specified in this document can be applied in all of the   foregoing contexts.   To increase the likelihood that memorable, human-friendly names will   work in ways that make sense for typical users throughout the world,   this document defines rules for preparing, enforcing, and comparing   internationalized nicknames.1.2.  Terminology   Many important terms used in this document are defined in [RFC7564],   [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   [RFC2119].2.  Nickname Profile2.1.  Rules   The following rules apply within the Nickname profile of the PRECIS   FreeformClass.   1.  Width Mapping Rule: There is no width-mapping rule (such a rule       is not necessary because width mapping is performed as part of       normalization using Normalization Form KC (NFKC) as specified       below).Saint-Andre                  Standards Track                    [Page 3]

RFC 7700                    PRECIS: Nickname               December 2015   2.  Additional Mapping Rule: The additional mapping rule consists of       the following sub-rules.       1.  Any instances of non-ASCII space MUST be mapped to ASCII           space (U+0020); a non-ASCII space is any Unicode code point           having a general category of "Zs", naturally with the           exception of U+0020.       2.  Any instances of the ASCII space character at the beginning           or end of a nickname MUST be removed (e.g., "stpeter " is           mapped to "stpeter").       3.  Interior sequences of more than one ASCII space character           MUST be mapped to a single ASCII space character (e.g.,           "St  Peter" is mapped to "St Peter").   3.  Case Mapping Rule: Unicode Default Case Folding MUST be applied,       as defined in the Unicode Standard [Unicode] (at the time of this       writing, the algorithm is specified in Chapter 3 of       [Unicode7.0]).  In applications that prohibit conflicting       nicknames, this rule helps to reduce the possibility of confusion       by ensuring that nicknames differing only by case (e.g.,       "stpeter" vs. "StPeter") would not be presented to a human user       at the same time.   4.  Normalization Rule: The string MUST be normalized using Unicode       NFKC.  Because NFKC is more "aggressive" in finding matches than       other normalization forms (in the terminology of Unicode, it       performs both canonical and compatibility decomposition before       recomposing code points), this rule helps to reduce the       possibility of confusion by increasing the number of characters       that would match (e.g., U+2163 ROMAN NUMERAL FOUR would match the       combination of U+0049 LATIN CAPITAL LETTER I and U+0056 LATIN       CAPITAL LETTER V).   5.  Directionality Rule: There is no directionality rule.  The "Bidi       Rule" (defined in [RFC5893]) and similar rules are unnecessary       and inapplicable to nicknames, because it is perfectly acceptable       for a given nickname to be presented differently in different       layout systems (e.g., a user interface that is configured to       handle primarily a right-to-left script versus an interface that       is configured to handle primarily a left-to-right script), as       long as the presentation is consistent in any given layout       system.Saint-Andre                  Standards Track                    [Page 4]

RFC 7700                    PRECIS: Nickname               December 20152.2.  Preparation   An entity that prepares a string for subsequent enforcement according   to this profile MUST ensure that the string consists only of Unicode   code points that conform to the FreeformClass string class defined in   [RFC7564].  In addition, the entity MUST ensure that the string is   encoded as UTF-8 [RFC3629].2.3.  Enforcement   An entity that performs enforcement according to this profile MUST   prepare a string as described inSection 2.2 and MUST also apply the   following rules specified inSection 2.1 in the order shown:   1.  Additional Mapping Rule   2.  Normalization Rule   3.  Directionality Rule   After all of the foregoing rules have been enforced, the entity MUST   ensure that the nickname is not zero bytes in length (this is done   after enforcing the rules to prevent applications from mistakenly   omitting a nickname entirely, because when internationalized   characters are accepted, a non-empty sequence of characters can   result in a zero-length nickname after canonicalization).2.4.  Comparison   An entity that performs comparison of two strings according to this   profile MUST prepare each string as specified inSection 2.2 and MUST   apply the following rules specified inSection 2.1 in the order   shown:   1.  Additional Mapping Rule   2.  Case Mapping Rule   3.  Normalization Rule   4.  Directionality Rule   The two strings are to be considered equivalent if they are an exact   octet-for-octet match (sometimes called "bit-string identity").3.  Examples   The following examples illustrate a small number of nicknames that   are consistent with the format defined above, along with the output   string resulting from application of the PRECIS rules (note that the   characters < and > are used to delineate the actual nickname and are   not part of the nickname strings).Saint-Andre                  Standards Track                    [Page 5]

RFC 7700                    PRECIS: Nickname               December 2015   Table 1: A Sample of Legal Nicknames   +---------------------------+-----------------------------------+   | # | Nickname              | Output for Comparison             |   +---------------------------+-----------------------------------+   | 1 | <Foo>                 | <foo>                             |   +---------------------------+-----------------------------------+   | 2 | <foo>                 | <foo>                             |   +---------------------------+-----------------------------------+   | 3 | <Foo Bar>             | <foo bar>                         |   +---------------------------+-----------------------------------+   | 4 | <foo bar>             | <foo bar>                         |   +---------------------------+-----------------------------------+   | 5 | <&#x3A3;>             | GREEK SMALL LETTER SIGMA (U+03C3) |   +---------------------------+-----------------------------------+   | 6 | <&#x3C3;>             | GREEK SMALL LETTER SIGMA (U+03C3) |   +---------------------------+-----------------------------------+   | 7 | <&#x3C2;>             | GREEK SMALL LETTER SIGMA (U+03C3) |   +---------------------------+-----------------------------------+   | 8 | <&#x265A;>            | BLACK CHESS KING (U+265A)         |   +---------------------------+-----------------------------------+   | 9 | <Richard &#x2163;>    | <richard iv>                      |   +---------------------------+-----------------------------------+   Regarding examples 5, 6, and 7: applying Unicode Default Case Folding   to GREEK CAPITAL LETTER SIGMA (U+03A3) results in GREEK SMALL LETTER   SIGMA (U+03C3), and the same is true of GREEK SMALL LETTER FINAL   SIGMA (U+03C2); therefore, the comparison operation defined inSection 2.4 would result in matching of the nicknames in examples 5,   6, and 7.  Regarding example 8: symbol characters such as BLACK CHESS   KING (U+265A) are allowed by the PRECIS FreeformClass and thus can be   used in nicknames.  Regarding example 9: applying Unicode Default   Case Folding to ROMAN NUMERAL FOUR (U+2163) results in SMALL ROMAN   NUMERAL FOUR (U+2173), and applying NFKC to SMALL ROMAN NUMERAL FOUR   (U+2173) results in LATIN SMALL LETTER I (U+0069) LATIN SMALL LETTER   V (U+0086).4.  Use in Application Protocols   This specification defines only the PRECIS-based rules for handling   of nickname strings.  It is the responsibility of an application   protocol (e.g., MSRP, XCON, or XMPP) or application definition to   specify the protocol slots in which nickname strings can appear, the   entities that are expected to enforce the rules governing nickname   strings, and when in protocol processing or interface handling the   rules need to be enforced.  SeeSection 6 of [RFC7564] for guidelines   about using PRECIS profiles in applications.Saint-Andre                  Standards Track                    [Page 6]

RFC 7700                    PRECIS: Nickname               December 2015   Above and beyond the PRECIS-based rules specified here, application   protocols can also define application-specific rules governing   nickname strings (rules regarding the minimum or maximum length of   nicknames, further restrictions on allowable characters or character   ranges, safeguards to mitigate the effects of visually similar   characters, etc.).   Naturally, application protocols can also specify rules governing the   actual use of nicknames in applications (reserved nicknames,   authorization requirements for using nicknames, whether certain   nicknames can be prohibited, handling of duplicates, the relationship   between nicknames and underlying identifiers such as SIP URIs or   Jabber IDs, etc.).   Entities that enforce the rules specified in this document are   encouraged to be liberal in what they accept by following this   procedure:   1.  Where possible, map characters (e.g, through width mapping,       additional mapping, case mapping, or normalization) and accept       the mapped string.   2.  If mapping is not possible (e.g., because a character is       disallowed in the FreeformClass), reject the string.5.  IANA Considerations   The IANA shall add the following entry to the PRECIS Profiles   Registry:   Name:  Nickname   Base Class:  FreeformClass   Applicability:  Nicknames in messaging and text conferencing      technologies; petnames for devices, accounts, and people; and      other uses of nicknames or petnames.   Replaces:  None   Width Mapping Rule:  None (handled via NFKC)   Additional Mapping Rule:  Map non-ASCII space characters to ASCII      space, strip leading and trailing space characters, map interior      sequences of multiple space characters to a single ASCII space.   Case Mapping Rule:  Map uppercase and titlecase characters to      lowercase using Unicode Default Case Folding.Saint-Andre                  Standards Track                    [Page 7]

RFC 7700                    PRECIS: Nickname               December 2015   Normalization Rule:  NFKC   Directionality Rule:  None   Enforcement:  To be specified by applications.   Specification:RFC 7700 (this document)6.  Security Considerations6.1.  Reuse of PRECIS   The security considerations described in [RFC7564] apply to the   FreeformClass string class used in this document for nicknames.6.2.  Reuse of Unicode   The security considerations described in [UTS39] apply to the use of   Unicode characters in nicknames.6.3.  Visually Similar Characters   [RFC7564] describes some of the security considerations related to   visually similar characters, also called "confusable characters" or   "confusables".   Although the mapping rules defined inSection 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 provided in [UTS39].7.  References7.1.  Normative References   [RFC2119]  Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate              Requirement Levels",BCP 14,RFC 2119,              DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997,              <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>.   [RFC3629]  Yergeau, F., "UTF-8, a transformation format of ISO              10646", STD 63,RFC 3629, DOI 10.17487/RFC3629, November              2003, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3629>.Saint-Andre                  Standards Track                    [Page 8]

RFC 7700                    PRECIS: Nickname               December 2015   [RFC5893]  Alvestrand, H., Ed. and C. Karp, "Right-to-Left Scripts              for Internationalized Domain Names for Applications              (IDNA)",RFC 5893, DOI 10.17487/RFC5893, August 2010,              <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5893>.   [RFC6365]  Hoffman, P. and J. Klensin, "Terminology Used in              Internationalization in the IETF",BCP 166,RFC 6365,              DOI 10.17487/RFC6365, September 2011,              <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6365>.   [RFC7564]  Saint-Andre, P. and M. Blanchet, "PRECIS Framework:              Preparation, Enforcement, and Comparison of              Internationalized Strings in Application Protocols",RFC 7564, DOI 10.17487/RFC7564, May 2015,              <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7564>.   [Unicode]  The Unicode Consortium, "The Unicode Standard",              <http://www.unicode.org/versions/latest/>.   [Unicode7.0]              The Unicode Consortium, "The Unicode Standard, Version              7.0.0", 2014,              <http://www.unicode.org/versions/Unicode7.0.0/>.   [UTS39]    The Unicode Consortium, "Unicode Technical Standard #39:              Unicode Security Mechanisms", November 2013,              <http://unicode.org/reports/tr39/>.7.2.  Informative References   [PETNAME-SYSTEMS]              Stiegler, M., "An Introduction to Petname Systems",              updated June 2012, February 2005,              <http://www.skyhunter.com/marcs/petnames/IntroPetNames.html>.   [RFC20]    Cerf, V., "ASCII format for network interchange", STD 80,RFC 20, DOI 10.17487/RFC0020, October 1969,              <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc20>.   [RFC2811]  Kalt, C., "Internet Relay Chat: Channel Management",RFC 2811, DOI 10.17487/RFC2811, April 2000,              <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2811>.   [RFC4975]  Campbell, B., Ed., Mahy, R., Ed., and C. Jennings, Ed.,              "The Message Session Relay Protocol (MSRP)",RFC 4975,              DOI 10.17487/RFC4975, September 2007,              <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4975>.Saint-Andre                  Standards Track                    [Page 9]

RFC 7700                    PRECIS: Nickname               December 2015   [RFC5239]  Barnes, M., Boulton, C., and O. Levin, "A Framework for              Centralized Conferencing",RFC 5239, DOI 10.17487/RFC5239,              June 2008, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5239>.   [RFC5322]  Resnick, P., Ed., "Internet Message Format",RFC 5322,              DOI 10.17487/RFC5322, October 2008,              <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5322>.   [RFC6120]  Saint-Andre, P., "Extensible Messaging and Presence              Protocol (XMPP): Core",RFC 6120, DOI 10.17487/RFC6120,              March 2011, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6120>.   [RFC7701]  Niemi, A., Garcia-Martin, M., and G. Sandbakken, "Multi-              party Chat Using the Message Session Relay Protocol              (MSRP)",RFC 7701, DOI 10.17487/RFC7701, December 2015,              <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7701>.   [XCON-SYSTEM]              Barnes, M., Boulton, C., and S. Loreto, "Chatrooms within              a Centralized Conferencing (XCON) System", Work in              Progress,draft-boulton-xcon-session-chat-08, July 2012.   [XEP-0045]              Saint-Andre, P., "Multi-User Chat", XSF XEP 0045, February              2012, <http://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0045.html>.   [XEP-0172]              Saint-Andre, P. and V. Mercier, "User Nickname", XSF              XEP 0172, March 2012,              <http://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0172.html>.Saint-Andre                  Standards Track                   [Page 10]

RFC 7700                    PRECIS: Nickname               December 2015Acknowledgements   Thanks to Kim Alvefur, Mary Barnes, Ben Campbell, Dave Cridland,   Miguel Garcia, Salvatore Loreto, Enrico Marocco, Matt Miller, and   Yoshiro YONEYA for their reviews and comments.   Paul Kyzivat and Melinda Shore reviewed the document for the General   Area Review Team and Operations Directorate, respectively.   During IESG review, Ben Campbell and Kathleen Moriarty provided   comments that led to further improvements.   Thanks to Matt Miller as Document Shepherd, Pete Resnick and Andrew   Sullivan as IANA Designated Experts, Marc Blanchet and Alexey   Melnikov as working group Chairs, and Barry Leiba as Area Director.   The author wishes to acknowledge Cisco Systems, Inc., for employing   him during his work on earlier draft versions of this document.Author's Address   Peter Saint-Andre   &yet   Email: peter@andyet.com   URI:https://andyet.com/Saint-Andre                  Standards Track                   [Page 11]

[8]ページ先頭

©2009-2025 Movatter.jp