RFC 6885: Stringprep Revision and Problem Statement for the Preparation and Comparison of Internationalized Strings (PRECIS)
In plain English — editorial summary, not part of the RFC
If a protocol expects to compare two strings and is prepared only for those strings to be ASCII, then using Unicode code points in those strings requires they be prepared somehow. Internationalizing Domain Names in Applications (here called IDNA2003) defined and used Stringprep and Nameprep. Other protocols subsequently defined Stringprep profiles. A new approach different from Stringprep and Nameprep is used for a revision of IDNA2003 (called IDNA2008). Other Stringprep profiles need to be similarly updated, or a replacement of Stringprep needs to be designed. This document outlines the issues to be faced by those designing a Stringprep replacement.
Document record
- Document ID
- RFC6885
- Published
- March 2013
- Authors
- M. Blanchet; A. Sullivan
- Status
- INFORMATIONAL
- Stream
- IETF
- Area
- art
- Pages
- 34
- Also known as
- —
Related documents
Ranked automatically by shared keywords, IETF area and stream — not by editorial selection.
- RFC 6884RTP Payload Format for the Enhanced Variable Rate Narrowband-Wideband Codec (EVRC-NW)Current
March 2013
- RFC 6881Best Current Practice for Communications Services in Support of Emergency CallingUpdated
March 2013
- RFC 6878IANA Registry for the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) "Priority" Header FieldCurrent
March 2013
- RFC 6871Session Description Protocol (SDP) Media Capabilities NegotiationCurrent
February 2013
- RFC 6901JavaScript Object Notation (JSON) PointerCurrent
April 2013
- RFC 6902JavaScript Object Notation (JSON) PatchCurrent
April 2013
- RFC 6849An Extension to the Session Description Protocol (SDP) and Real-time Transport Protocol (RTP) for Media LoopbackCurrent
February 2013
- RFC 6843RTP Control Protocol (RTCP) Extended Report (XR) Block for Delay Metric ReportingCurrent
January 2013
Also filed under
About this page
The document record above — title, authors, date, status, stream, area, relationships, DOI and errata — is imported verbatim from the public RFC Editor index. The “in plain English” section is editorial: written by The metasystema editorial team, not part of the RFC. Where the two differ, the RFC text governs.
Last checked against the RFC Editor index on . RFCs are never revised after publication; changes are issued as new documents.
Data sources · Editorial policy · Report a correction · What is an RFC?