Skip to main content

Shepherd writeup
draft-ietf-lager-specification

1. Summary

The document shepherd is Audric Schiltknecht.
The responsible Area Director is Barry Leiba.

   This document describes a method of representing rules for validating
   identifier labels and alternate representations of those labels using
   Extensible Markup Language (XML).  These policies, known as "Label
   Generation Rulesets" (LGRs), are used for the implementation of
   Internationalized Domain Names (IDNs), for example.  The rulesets are
   used to implement and share that aspect of policy defining which
   labels and Unicode code points are permitted for registrations, which
   alternative code points are considered variants, and what actions may
   be performed on labels containing those variants.

The document is seeking Standards Track as it is the normative specification on
the format and processing of Label Generation Rulesets.

2. Review and Consensus

The document was presented and discussed during at least two IETF meetings.
It has the support of the WG, and there are at least three independent
implementations of LGR processor with good coverage of WLE processing; the
format described is already used in expressing Root Zone LGR for various
writing systems.

3. Intellectual Property

The authors have affirmed that they have no knowledge of any IPR associated to
the document and are submitting it in compliance with BCPs 78 and 79.

There was no on-list discussion of IPR matters and none were reported.

4. Other Points

The document makes normative references to the Unicode Standard; these are
correct and approved by the WG.

The document requests two new registrations in existing IANA registries:
- a new entry in the Media Type registry which has been reviewed by the
media-types experts and comments have been integrated in the document; - a new
entry in the XML registry for a new namespace. The document also requests the
creation of a new IANA registry, to manage LGR dispositions. All requirements
for such registry are met.

The RFC Editor should be advised that the appendix tracking document changes
should be deleted prior to publication.
Back