RFC 8265: Preparation, Enforcement, and Comparison of Internationalized Strings Representing Usernames and Passwords
In plain English — editorial summary, not part of the RFC
This document describes updated methods for handling Unicode strings representing usernames and passwords. The previous approach was known as SASLprep (RFC 4013) and was based on Stringprep (RFC 3454). The methods specified in this document provide a more sustainable approach to the handling of internationalized usernames and passwords. This document obsoletes RFC 7613.
Document record
- Document ID
- RFC8265
- Published
- October 2017
- Authors
- P. Saint-Andre; A. Melnikov
- Status
- PROPOSED STANDARD
- Stream
- IETF
- Area
- art
- Pages
- 26
- Also known as
- —
- Obsoletes:
- RFC 7613
Topics
Standards lineage
This document is one revision in a chain of 3 RFCs, each formally replacing the one before it.
- RFC 4013 (2005)
- RFC 7613 (2015)
- RFC 8265 (2017)
Related documents
Ranked automatically by shared keywords, IETF area and stream — not by editorial selection.
- RFC 8264PRECIS Framework: Preparation, Enforcement, and Comparison of Internationalized Strings in Application ProtocolsCurrent
October 2017
- RFC 7622Extensible Messaging and Presence Protocol (XMPP): Address FormatUpdated
September 2015
- RFC 7564PRECIS Framework: Preparation, Enforcement, and Comparison of Internationalized Strings in Application ProtocolsObsoleted
May 2015
- RFC 6409Message Submission for MailUpdated
November 2011
- RFC 5137ASCII Escaping of Unicode CharactersCurrent
February 2008
- RFC 3467Role of the Domain Name System (DNS)Current
March 2003
- RFC 8292Voluntary Application Server Identification (VAPID) for Web PushCurrent
November 2017
- RFC 8301Cryptographic Algorithm and Key Usage Update to DomainKeys Identified Mail (DKIM)Current
January 2018
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?