On Wed, Aug 29, 2018 at 08:58:59PM -0500, Ben Campbell wrote: > > > > On Aug 29, 2018, at 8:10 PM, Richard Barnes <r...@ipv.sx> wrote: > > > > > > I am not an ART AD, but there is not yet an internationalization > > directorate, and seeing statements like "inputs for digest computations > > MUST be encoded using the UTF-8 character set" (Section 5) without > > additional discussion of normalization and/or what the canonical form for > > the digest input is makes me nervous. Has sufficient internationalization > > review been performed to ensure that there are no latent issues in this > > space? > > > > Two of the three ART ADs have already signed off, so we have that going for > > us :) > > > > The only place we have human-readable text is in the problem documents, so > > at that level, the i18n considerations are handled by that spec. Other > > than that, everything is ASCII, so saying "UTF-8" is just a fancy way of > > saying, "don't send extra zero bytes". > > > > I am an ART AD, for what it’s worth :-) > > I didn’t sweat this because of the exact reason mentioned; that is, this > seems mostly not intended to be read by humans.
I also didn't expect any issues, but felt the need to explicitly check :) (BTW, what are the digest computations that are referred to? I was not sure on first read.) I think that we've discussed this point enough, and will reply to the other ones on a different fork of the thread. -Benjamin > On a related note, I did note some heartburn about the reference to RFC 3492 > for IDNA, but for the purposes of ACME I suspect that’s the right thing to > do. OTOH, Alexey is more of an expert on IDNA than I am. Alexey? > > Ben. _______________________________________________ Acme mailing list Acme@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/acme
