7 Internet-Draft Kurt D. Zeilenga
8 Intended Category: Standard Track OpenLDAP Foundation
9 Expires in six months 23 January 2006
13 LDAP: Internationalized String Preparation
14 <draft-ietf-ldapbis-strprep-07.txt>
20 This document is intended to be published as a Standard Track RFC.
21 Distribution of this memo is unlimited. Technical discussion of this
22 document will take place on the IETF LDAP Revision Working Group
23 mailing list <ietf-ldapbis@openldap.org>. Please send editorial
24 comments directly to the editor <Kurt@OpenLDAP.org>.
26 By submitting this Internet-Draft, each author represents that any
27 applicable patent or other IPR claims of which he or she is aware have
28 been or will be disclosed, and any of which he or she becomes aware
29 will be disclosed, in accordance with Section 6 of BCP 79.
31 Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Task
32 Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that other
33 groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-Drafts.
35 Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
36 and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
37 time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference material
38 or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
40 The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at
41 http://www.ietf.org/1id-abstracts.html
43 The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at
44 http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html
47 Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2006). All Rights Reserved.
49 Please see the Full Copyright section near the end of this document
58 Zeilenga LDAPprep [Page 1]
60 Internet-Draft draft-ietf-ldapbis-strprep-07 23 January 2006
65 The previous Lightweight Directory Access Protocol (LDAP) technical
66 specifications did not precisely define how character string matching
67 is to be performed. This led to a number of usability and
68 interoperability problems. This document defines string preparation
69 algorithms for character-based matching rules defined for use in LDAP.
74 The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
75 "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
76 document are to be interpreted as described in BCP 14 [RFC2119].
78 Character names in this document use the notation for code points and
79 names from the Unicode Standard [Unicode]. For example, the letter
80 "a" may be represented as either <U+0061> or <LATIN SMALL LETTER A>.
81 In the lists of mappings and the prohibited characters, the "U+" is
82 left off to make the lists easier to read. The comments for character
83 ranges are shown in square brackets (such as "[CONTROL CHARACTERS]")
84 and do not come from the standard.
86 Note: a glossary of terms used in Unicode can be found in [Glossary].
87 Information on the Unicode character encoding model can be found in
90 The term "combining mark", as used in this specification, refers to
91 any Unicode [Unicode] code point which has a mark property (Mn, Mc,
92 Me). Appendix A provides a definitive list of combining marks.
99 A Lightweight Directory Access Protocol (LDAP) [Roadmap] matching rule
100 [Syntaxes] defines an algorithm for determining whether a presented
101 value matches an attribute value in accordance with the criteria
102 defined for the rule. The proposition may be evaluated to True,
105 True - the attribute contains a matching value,
107 False - the attribute contains no matching value,
109 Undefined - it cannot be determined whether the attribute contains
110 a matching value or not.
114 Zeilenga LDAPprep [Page 2]
116 Internet-Draft draft-ietf-ldapbis-strprep-07 23 January 2006
119 For instance, the caseIgnoreMatch matching rule may be used to compare
120 whether the commonName attribute contains a particular value without
121 regard for case and insignificant spaces.
124 1.2. X.500 String Matching Rules
126 "X.520: Selected attribute types" [X.520] provides (amongst other
127 things) value syntaxes and matching rules for comparing values
128 commonly used in the Directory. These specifications are inadequate
129 for strings composed of Unicode [Unicode] characters.
131 The caseIgnoreMatch matching rule [X.520], for example, is simply
132 defined as being a case insensitive comparison where insignificant
133 spaces are ignored. For printableString, there is only one space
134 character and case mapping is bijective, hence this definition is
135 sufficient. However, for Unicode string types such as
136 universalString, this is not sufficient. For example, a case
137 insensitive matching implementation which folded lower case characters
138 to upper case would yield different different results than an
139 implementation which used upper case to lower case folding. Or one
140 implementation may view space as referring to only SPACE (U+0020), a
141 second implementation may view any character with the space separator
142 (Zs) property as a space, and another implementation may view any
143 character with the whitespace (WS) category as a space.
145 The lack of precise specification for character string matching has
146 led to significant interoperability problems. When used in
147 certificate chain validation, security vulnerabilities can arise. To
148 address these problems, this document defines precise algorithms for
149 preparing character strings for matching.
152 1.3. Relationship to "stringprep"
154 The character string preparation algorithms described in this document
155 are based upon the "stringprep" approach [RFC3454]. In "stringprep",
156 presented and stored values are first prepared for comparison and so
157 that a character-by-character comparison yields the "correct" result.
159 The approach used here is a refinement of the "stringprep" [RFC3454]
160 approach. Each algorithm involves two additional preparation steps.
162 a) prior to applying the Unicode string preparation steps outlined in
163 "stringprep", the string is transcoded to Unicode;
165 b) after applying the Unicode string preparation steps outlined in
166 "stringprep", the string is modified to appropriately handle
170 Zeilenga LDAPprep [Page 3]
172 Internet-Draft draft-ietf-ldapbis-strprep-07 23 January 2006
175 characters insignificant to the matching rule.
177 Hence, preparation of character strings for X.500 matching involves
184 5) Check Bidi (Bidirectional)
185 6) Insignificant Character Handling
187 These steps are described in Section 2.
189 It is noted that while various tables of Unicode characters included
190 or referenced by this specification are derived from Unicode [UNICODE]
191 data, these tables are to be considered definitive for the purpose of
192 implementing this specification.
195 1.4. Relationship to the LDAP Technical Specification
197 This document is a integral part of the LDAP technical specification
198 [Roadmap] which obsoletes the previously defined LDAP technical
199 specification [RFC3377] in its entirety.
201 This document details new LDAP internationalized character string
202 preparation algorithms used by [Syntaxes] and possible other technical
203 specifications defining LDAP syntaxes and/or matching rules.
206 1.5. Relationship to X.500
208 LDAP is defined [Roadmap] in X.500 terms as an X.500 access mechanism.
209 As such, there is a strong desire for alignment between LDAP and X.500
210 syntax and semantics. The character string preparation algorithms
211 described in this document are based upon "Internationalized String
212 Matching Rules for X.500" [XMATCH] proposal to ITU/ISO Joint Study
216 2. String Preparation
218 The following six-step process SHALL be applied to each presented and
219 attribute value in preparation for character string matching rule
226 Zeilenga LDAPprep [Page 4]
228 Internet-Draft draft-ietf-ldapbis-strprep-07 23 January 2006
235 6) Insignificant Character Handling
237 Failure in any step causes the assertion to evaluate to Undefined.
239 The character repertoire of this process is Unicode 3.2 [Unicode].
241 Note that this six-step process specification is intended to described
242 expected matching behavior. Implementations are free use alternative
243 processes so long as the matching rule evaluation behavior provided is
244 consistent with the behavior described by this specification.
249 Each non-Unicode string value is transcoded to Unicode.
251 PrintableString [X.680] value are transcoded directly to Unicode.
253 UniversalString, UTF8String, and bmpString [X.680] values need not be
254 transcoded as they are Unicode-based strings (in the case of
255 bmpString, a subset of Unicode).
257 TeletexString [X.680] values are transcoded to Unicode. As there is
258 no standard for mapping TeletexString values to Unicode, the mapping
259 is left a local matter.
261 For these and other reasons, use of TeletexString is NOT RECOMMENDED.
263 The output is the transcoded string.
268 SOFT HYPHEN (U+00AD) and MONGOLIAN TODO SOFT HYPHEN (U+1806) code
269 points are mapped to nothing. COMBINING GRAPHEME JOINER (U+034F) and
270 VARIATION SELECTORs (U+180B-180D, FF00-FE0F) code points are also
271 mapped to nothing. The OBJECT REPLACEMENT CHARACTER (U+FFFC) is
274 CHARACTER TABULATION (U+0009), LINE FEED (LF) (U+000A), LINE
275 TABULATION (U+000B), FORM FEED (FF) (U+000C), CARRIAGE RETURN (CR)
276 (U+000D), and NEXT LINE (NEL) (U+0085) are mapped to SPACE (U+0020).
278 All other control code (e.g., Cc) points or code points with a control
282 Zeilenga LDAPprep [Page 5]
284 Internet-Draft draft-ietf-ldapbis-strprep-07 23 January 2006
287 function (e.g., Cf) are mapped to nothing. The following is a
288 complete list of these code points: U+0000-0008, 000E-001F, 007F-0084,
289 0086-009F, 06DD, 070F, 180E, 200C-200F, 202A-202E, 2060-2063,
290 206A-206F, FEFF, FFF9-FFFB, 1D173-1D17A, E0001, E0020-E007F.
292 ZERO WIDTH SPACE (U+200B) is mapped to nothing. All other code points
293 with Separator (space, line, or paragraph) property (e.g, Zs, Zl, or
294 Zp) are mapped to SPACE (U+0020). The following is a complete list of
295 these code points: U+0020, 00A0, 1680, 2000-200A, 2028-2029, 202F,
298 For case ignore, numeric, and stored prefix string matching rules,
299 characters are case folded per B.2 of [RFC3454].
301 The output is the mapped string.
306 The input string is be normalized to Unicode Form KC (compatibility
307 composed) as described in [UAX15]. The output is the normalized
313 All Unassigned code points are prohibited. Unassigned code points are
314 listed in Table A.1 of [RFC3454].
316 Characters which, per Section 5.8 of [Stringprep], change display
317 properties or are deprecated are prohibited. These characters are are
318 listed in Table C.8 of [RFC3454].
320 Private Use code points are prohibited. These characters are listed
321 in Table C.3 of [RFC3454].
323 All non-character code points are prohibited. These code points are
324 listed in Table C.4 of [RFC3454].
326 Surrogate codes are prohibited. These characters are listed in Table
329 The REPLACEMENT CHARACTER (U+FFFD) code point is prohibited.
331 The step fails if the input string contains any prohibited code point.
332 Otherwise, the output is the input string.
338 Zeilenga LDAPprep [Page 6]
340 Internet-Draft draft-ietf-ldapbis-strprep-07 23 January 2006
345 Bidirectional characters are ignored.
348 2.6. Insignificant Character Handling
350 In this step, the string is modified to ensure proper handling of
351 characters insignificant to the matching rule. This modification
352 differs from matching rule to matching rule.
354 Section 2.6.1 applies to case ignore and exact string matching.
355 Section 2.6.2 applies to numericString matching.
356 Section 2.6.3 applies to telephoneNumber matching.
359 2.6.1. Insignificant Space Handling
361 For the purposes of this section, a space is defined to be the SPACE
362 (U+0020) code point followed by no combining marks.
364 NOTE - The previous steps ensure that the string cannot contain any
365 code points in the separator class, other than SPACE (U+0020).
367 If the input string contains at least one non-space character, then
368 the string is modified such that the string starts with exactly one
369 space character, ends with exactly one SPACE character, and that any
370 inner (non-empty) sequence of space characters is replaced with
371 exactly two SPACE characters. For instance, the input strings
372 "foo<SPACE>bar<SPACE><SPACE>", results in the output
373 "<SPACE>foo<SPACE><SPACE>bar<SPACE>".
375 Otherwise, if the string being prepared is an initial, any, or final
376 substring, then the output string is exactly one SPACE character, else
377 the output string is exactly two SPACEs.
379 Appendix B discusses the rationale for the behavior.
382 2.6.2. numericString Insignificant Character Handling
384 For the purposes of this section, a space is defined to be the SPACE
385 (U+0020) code point followed by no combining marks.
387 All spaces are regarded as insignificant and are to be removed.
389 For example, removal of spaces from the Form KC string:
390 "<SPACE><SPACE>123<SPACE><SPACE>456<SPACE><SPACE>"
394 Zeilenga LDAPprep [Page 7]
396 Internet-Draft draft-ietf-ldapbis-strprep-07 23 January 2006
399 would result in the output string:
401 and the Form KC string:
402 "<SPACE><SPACE><SPACE>"
403 would result in the output string:
404 "" (an empty string).
407 2.6.3. telephoneNumber Insignificant Character Handling
409 For the purposes of this section, a hyphen is defined to be
410 HYPHEN-MINUS (U+002D), ARMENIAN HYPHEN (U+058A), HYPHEN (U+2010),
411 NON-BREAKING HYPHEN (U+2011), MINUS SIGN (U+2212), SMALL HYPHEN-MINUS
412 (U+FE63), or FULLWIDTH HYPHEN-MINUS (U+FF0D) code point followed by no
413 combining marks and a space is defined to be the SPACE (U+0020) code
414 point followed by no combining marks.
416 All hyphens and spaces are considered insignificant and are to be
419 For example, removal of hyphens and spaces from the Form KC string:
420 "<SPACE><HYPHEN>123<SPACE><SPACE>456<SPACE><HYPHEN>"
421 would result in the output string:
423 and the Form KC string:
424 "<HYPHEN><HYPHEN><HYPHEN>"
425 would result in the (empty) output string:
429 3. Security Considerations
431 "Preparation for International Strings ('stringprep')" [RFC3454]
432 security considerations generally apply to the algorithms described
438 The approach used in this document is based upon design principles and
439 algorithms described in "Preparation of Internationalized Strings
440 ('stringprep')" [RFC3454] by Paul Hoffman and Marc Blanchet. Some
441 additional guidance was drawn from Unicode Technical Standards,
442 Technical Reports, and Notes.
444 This document is a product of the IETF LDAP Revision (LDAPBIS) Working
450 Zeilenga LDAPprep [Page 8]
452 Internet-Draft draft-ietf-ldapbis-strprep-07 23 January 2006
460 Email: Kurt@OpenLDAP.org
465 [[Note to the RFC Editor: please replace the citation tags used in
466 referencing Internet-Drafts with tags of the form RFCnnnn where
470 6.1. Normative References
472 [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
473 Requirement Levels", BCP 14 (also RFC 2119), March 1997.
475 [RFC3454] Hoffman, P. and M. Blanchet, "Preparation of
476 Internationalized Strings ('stringprep')", RFC 3454,
479 [Roadmap] Zeilenga, K. (editor), "LDAP: Technical Specification
480 Road Map", draft-ietf-ldapbis-roadmap-xx.txt, a work in
483 [Syntaxes] Legg, S. (editor), "LDAP: Syntaxes and Matching Rules",
484 draft-ietf-ldapbis-syntaxes-xx.txt, a work in progress.
486 [Unicode] The Unicode Consortium, "The Unicode Standard, Version
487 3.2.0" is defined by "The Unicode Standard, Version 3.0"
488 (Reading, MA, Addison-Wesley, 2000. ISBN 0-201-61633-5),
489 as amended by the "Unicode Standard Annex #27: Unicode
490 3.1" (http://www.unicode.org/reports/tr27/) and by the
491 "Unicode Standard Annex #28: Unicode 3.2"
492 (http://www.unicode.org/reports/tr28/).
494 [UAX15] Davis, M. and M. Duerst, "Unicode Standard Annex #15:
495 Unicode Normalization Forms, Version 3.2.0".
496 <http://www.unicode.org/unicode/reports/tr15/tr15-22.html>,
499 [X.680] International Telecommunication Union -
500 Telecommunication Standardization Sector, "Abstract
501 Syntax Notation One (ASN.1) - Specification of Basic
502 Notation", X.680(2002) (also ISO/IEC 8824-1:2002).
506 Zeilenga LDAPprep [Page 9]
508 Internet-Draft draft-ietf-ldapbis-strprep-07 23 January 2006
511 6.2. Informative References
513 [X.500] International Telecommunication Union -
514 Telecommunication Standardization Sector, "The Directory
515 -- Overview of concepts, models and services,"
516 X.500(1993) (also ISO/IEC 9594-1:1994).
518 [X.501] International Telecommunication Union -
519 Telecommunication Standardization Sector, "The Directory
520 -- Models," X.501(1993) (also ISO/IEC 9594-2:1994).
522 [X.520] International Telecommunication Union -
523 Telecommunication Standardization Sector, "The
524 Directory: Selected Attribute Types", X.520(1993) (also
525 ISO/IEC 9594-6:1994).
527 [Glossary] The Unicode Consortium, "Unicode Glossary",
528 <http://www.unicode.org/glossary/>.
530 [CharModel] Whistler, K. and M. Davis, "Unicode Technical Report
531 #17, Character Encoding Model", UTR17,
532 <http://www.unicode.org/unicode/reports/tr17/>, August
535 [Filters] Smith, M. (editor), LDAPbis WG, "LDAP: String
536 Representation of Search Filters",
537 draft-ietf-ldapbis-filter-xx.txt, a work in progress.
539 [XMATCH] Zeilenga, K., "Internationalized String Matching Rules
540 for X.500", draft-zeilenga-ldapbis-strmatch-xx.txt, a
544 Appendix A. Combining Marks
546 This appendix is normative.
548 This table was derived from Unicode [Unicode] data
549 files, it lists all code points with the Mn, Mc, or Me
550 properties. This table is to be considered definitive
551 for the purposes of implementation of this
555 0300-034F 0360-036F 0483-0486 0488-0489 0591-05A1
556 05A3-05B9 05BB-05BC 05BF 05C1-05C2 05C4 064B-0655 0670
557 06D6-06DC 06DE-06E4 06E7-06E8 06EA-06ED 0711 0730-074A
558 07A6-07B0 0901-0903 093C 093E-094F 0951-0954 0962-0963
562 Zeilenga LDAPprep [Page 10]
564 Internet-Draft draft-ietf-ldapbis-strprep-07 23 January 2006
567 0981-0983 09BC 09BE-09C4 09C7-09C8 09CB-09CD 09D7
568 09E2-09E3 0A02 0A3C 0A3E-0A42 0A47-0A48 0A4B-0A4D
569 0A70-0A71 0A81-0A83 0ABC 0ABE-0AC5 0AC7-0AC9 0ACB-0ACD
570 0B01-0B03 0B3C 0B3E-0B43 0B47-0B48 0B4B-0B4D 0B56-0B57
571 0B82 0BBE-0BC2 0BC6-0BC8 0BCA-0BCD 0BD7 0C01-0C03
572 0C3E-0C44 0C46-0C48 0C4A-0C4D 0C55-0C56 0C82-0C83
573 0CBE-0CC4 0CC6-0CC8 0CCA-0CCD 0CD5-0CD6 0D02-0D03
574 0D3E-0D43 0D46-0D48 0D4A-0D4D 0D57 0D82-0D83 0DCA
575 0DCF-0DD4 0DD6 0DD8-0DDF 0DF2-0DF3 0E31 0E34-0E3A
576 0E47-0E4E 0EB1 0EB4-0EB9 0EBB-0EBC 0EC8-0ECD 0F18-0F19
577 0F35 0F37 0F39 0F3E-0F3F 0F71-0F84 0F86-0F87 0F90-0F97
578 0F99-0FBC 0FC6 102C-1032 1036-1039 1056-1059 1712-1714
579 1732-1734 1752-1753 1772-1773 17B4-17D3 180B-180D 18A9
580 20D0-20EA 302A-302F 3099-309A FB1E FE00-FE0F FE20-FE23
581 1D165-1D169 1D16D-1D172 1D17B-1D182 1D185-1D18B
586 Appendix B. Substrings Matching
588 This appendix is non-normative.
590 In absence of substrings matching, the insignificant
591 space handling for case ignore/exact matching could be
592 simplified. Specifically, the handling could be as
593 require all sequences of one or more spaces be replaced
594 with one space and, if string contains non-space
595 characters, removal of all all leading spaces and
598 In the presence of substrings matching, this simplified
599 space handling would lead to unexpected and undesirable
600 matching behavior. For instance:
601 1) (CN=foo\20*\20bar) would match the CN value "foobar" but not
602 "foo<SPACE>bar" nor "foo<SPACE><SPACE>bar";
603 2) (CN=*\20foobar\20*) would match "foobar", but (CN=*\20*foobar*\20*)
605 3) (CN=foo\20*\20bar) would match "foo<SPACE>X<SPACE>bar" but not
606 "foo<SPACE><SPACE>bar".
608 Note to readers not familiar with LDAP substrings matching: the LDAP
609 filter [Filters] assertion (CN=A*B*C) says "match any value (of the
610 attribute CN) which begins with A, contains B after A, ends with C
611 where C is also after B."
613 The first case illustrates that this simplified space handling would
614 cause leading and trailing spaces in substrings of the string to be
618 Zeilenga LDAPprep [Page 11]
620 Internet-Draft draft-ietf-ldapbis-strprep-07 23 January 2006
623 regarded as insignificant. However, only leading and trailing (as
624 well as multiple consecutive spaces) of the string (as a whole) are
627 The second case illustrates that this simplified space handling would
628 cause sub-partitioning failures. That is, if a prepared any substring
629 matches a partition of the attribute value, then an assertion
630 constructed by subdividing that substring into multiple substrings
633 The third case illustrates that this simplified space handling causes
634 another partitioning failure. Though both the initial or final
635 strings match different portions of "foo<SPACE>X<SPACE>bar" with
636 neither matching the X portion, they don't match a string consisting
637 of the two matched portions less the unmatched X portion.
639 In designing an appropriate approach for space handling for substrings
640 matching, one must study key aspects of X.500 case exact/ignore
641 matching. X.520 [X.520] says:
642 The [substrings] rule returns TRUE if there is a partitioning of
643 the attribute value (into portions) such that:
644 - the specified substrings (initial, any, final) match different
645 portions of the value in the order of the strings sequence;
646 - initial, if present, matches the first portion of the value;
647 - final, if present, matches the last portion of the value;
648 - any, if present, matches some arbitrary portion of the value.
650 That is, the substrings assertion (CN=foo\20*\20bar) matches the
651 attribute value "foo<SPACE><SPACE>bar" as the value can be partitioned
652 into the portions "foo<SPACE>" and "<SPACE>bar" meeting the above
656 [T]he following spaces are regarded as not significant:
657 - leading spaces (i.e. those preceding the first character that is
659 - trailing spaces (i.e. those following the last character that is
661 - multiple consecutive spaces (these are taken as equivalent to a
662 single space character).
664 This statement applies to the assertion values and attribute values
665 as whole strings, and not individually to substrings of an assertion
666 value. In particular, the statements should be taken to mean that
667 if an assertion value and attribute value match without any
668 consideration to insignificant characters, then that assertion value
669 should also match any attribute value which differs only by inclusion
670 or removal of insignificant characters.
674 Zeilenga LDAPprep [Page 12]
676 Internet-Draft draft-ietf-ldapbis-strprep-07 23 January 2006
679 Hence, the assertion (CN=foo\20*\20bar) matches
680 "foo<SPACE><SPACE><SPACE>bar" and "foo<SPACE>bar" as these values
681 only differ from "foo<SPACE><SPACE>bar" by the inclusion or removal
682 of insignificant spaces.
684 Astute readers of this text will also note that there are special
685 cases where the specified space handling does not ignore spaces
686 which could be considered insignificant. For instance, the assertion
687 (CN=\20*\20*\20) does not match "<SPACE><SPACE><SPACE>"
688 (insignificant spaces present in value) nor " " (insignificant
689 spaces not present in value). However, as these cases have no
690 practical application that cannot be met by simple assertions, e.g.
691 (cn=\20), and this minor anomaly can only be fully addressed by a
692 preparation algorithm to be used in conjunction with
693 character-by-character partitioning and matching, the anomaly is
694 considered acceptable.
698 Intellectual Property Rights
700 The IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any
701 Intellectual Property Rights or other rights that might be claimed
702 to pertain to the implementation or use of the technology described
703 in this document or the extent to which any license under such
704 rights might or might not be available; nor does it represent that
705 it has made any independent effort to identify any such rights.
706 Information on the procedures with respect to rights in RFC documents
707 can be found in BCP 78 and BCP 79.
709 Copies of IPR disclosures made to the IETF Secretariat and any
710 assurances of licenses to be made available, or the result of an
711 attempt made to obtain a general license or permission for the use
712 of such proprietary rights by implementers or users of this
713 specification can be obtained from the IETF on-line IPR repository
714 at http://www.ietf.org/ipr.
716 The IETF invites any interested party to bring to its attention any
717 copyrights, patents or patent applications, or other proprietary
718 rights that may cover technology that may be required to implement
719 this standard. Please address the information to the IETF at
726 Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2006).
730 Zeilenga LDAPprep [Page 13]
732 Internet-Draft draft-ietf-ldapbis-strprep-07 23 January 2006
735 This document is subject to the rights, licenses and restrictions
736 contained in BCP 78, and except as set forth therein, the authors
737 retain all their rights.
739 This document and the information contained herein are provided on an
740 "AS IS" basis and THE CONTRIBUTOR, THE ORGANIZATION HE/SHE
741 REPRESENTS OR IS SPONSORED BY (IF ANY), THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE
742 INTERNET ENGINEERING TASK FORCE DISCLAIM ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR
743 IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF
744 THE INFORMATION HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED
745 WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.
786 Zeilenga LDAPprep [Page 14]