[Docs] [txt|pdf|xml] [Tracker] [Email] [Diff1] [Diff2] [Nits]

Versions: (draft-flanagan-nonascii) 00 01 02 RFC 7997

Internet Architecture Board                             H. Flanagan, Ed.
Internet-Draft                                                RFC Editor
Updates: 7322 (if approved)                               April 25, 2016
Intended status: Informational
Expires: October 27, 2016


                The Use of Non-ASCII Characters in RFCs
                       draft-iab-rfc-nonascii-02

Abstract

   In order to support the internationalization of protocols and a more
   diverse Internet community, the RFC Series must evolve to allow for
   the use of non-ASCII characters in RFCs.  While English remains the
   required language of the Series, the encoding of future RFCs will be
   in UTF-8, allowing for a broader range of characters than typically
   used in the English language.  This document describes the RFC Editor
   requirements and guidance regarding the use of non-ASCII characters
   in RFCs.

   This document updates RFC 7322.  Please review the PDF version of
   this draft.

Status of This Memo

   This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
   provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.

   Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
   Task Force (IETF).  Note that other groups may also distribute
   working documents as Internet-Drafts.  The list of current Internet-
   Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.

   Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
   and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
   time.  It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
   material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."

   This Internet-Draft will expire on October 27, 2016.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2016 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
   document authors.  All rights reserved.

   This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
   Provisions Relating to IETF Documents


Flanagan                Expires October 27, 2016                [Page 1]


Internet-Draft              non-ASCII in RFCs                 April 2016


   (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
   publication of this document.  Please review these documents
   carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
   to this document.  Code Components extracted from this document must
   include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
   the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
   described in the Simplified BSD License.

Table of Contents

   1.  Introduction  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   2
   2.  Basic Requirements  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
   3.  Rules for the Use of Non-ASCII Characters . . . . . . . . . .   4
     3.1.  General Usage Throughout a Document . . . . . . . . . . .   4
     3.2.  Person Names  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
     3.3.  Company Names . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
     3.4.  Body of the Document  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
     3.5.  Tables  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
     3.6.  Code Components . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9
     3.7.  Bibliographic Text  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9
     3.8.  Keywords and Citation Tags  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  10
     3.9.  Address Information . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  10
   4.  Normalization Forms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  11
   5.  XML Markup  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  11
   6.  IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  11
   7.  Internationalization Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . .  11
   8.  Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  11
   9.  Change log - to be removed by the RFC Editor  . . . . . . . .  11
     9.1.  draft-iab-rfc-nonascii-01 to -02  . . . . . . . . . . . .  11
     9.2.  draft-iab-rfc-nonascii-00 to -01  . . . . . . . . . . . .  12
     9.3.  draft-flanagan-nonascii to draft-iab-rfc-nonascii-00  . .  12
     9.4.  -04 to -05  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  12
     9.5.  -04 to -05  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  12
     9.6.  -02 to -04  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  12
   10. References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  12
   Appendix A.  Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  13
   Author's Address  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  14

1.  Introduction

   Please review the PDF version of this draft.

   For much of the history of the RFC Series, the character encoding
   used for RFCs has been ASCII [RFC0020].  This was a sensible choice
   at the time: the language of the Series has always been English, a
   language that primarily uses ASCII-encoded characters (ignoring for a
   moment words borrowed from more richly decorated alphabets); and,




Flanagan                Expires October 27, 2016                [Page 2]


Internet-Draft              non-ASCII in RFCs                 April 2016


   ASCII is the "lowest common denominator" for character encoding,
   making cross-platform viewing trivial.

   There are limits to ASCII, however, that hinder its continued use as
   the exclusive character encoding for the Series.  The increasing need
   for easily readable, internationalized content suggests it is time to
   allow non-ASCII characters in RFCs where necessary.  To support this
   move away from ASCII, RFCs will switch to supporting UTF-8 as the
   default character encoding and allow support for a broad range of
   Unicode character support.  [UnicodeCurrent]  Note that the RFC
   Editor may reject any codepoint that does not render adequately in
   enough formats or on in enough rendering engines using the current
   tooling.

   Given the continuing goal of maximum readability across platforms,
   the use of non-ASCII characters should be limited in a document to
   only where necessary within the text.  This document describes the
   rules under which non-ASCII characters may be used in an RFC.  These
   rules will be applied as the necessary changes are made to submission
   checking and editorial tools.

   This document updates the RFC Style Guide [RFC7322].

   The details described in this document are expected to change based
   on experience gained in implementing the RFC production center's
   toolset.  Revised documents will be published capturing those changes
   as the toolset is completed.  Other implementers must not expect
   those changes to remain backwards-compatible with the details
   described in this document.

2.  Basic Requirements

   Two fundamental requirements inform the guidance and examples
   provided in this document.  They are:

   o  Searches against RFC indexes and database tables need to return
      expected results and support appropriate Unicode string matching
      behaviors;

   o  RFCs must be able to display correctly across a wide range of
      readers and browsers.  People whose systems do not have the fonts
      needed to display a particular RFC need to be able to read the
      various publication formats and the XML correctly in order to
      understand and implement the information described in the
      document.



Flanagan                Expires October 27, 2016                [Page 3]


Internet-Draft              non-ASCII in RFCs                 April 2016


3.  Rules for the Use of Non-ASCII Characters

   This section describes the guidelines for the use of non-ASCII
   characters in an RFC.  If the RFC Editor identifies areas where the
   use of non-ASCII characters negatively impacts the readability of the
   text, they will request alternate text.

   The RFC Editor may, in cases of entire words represented in non-ASCII
   characters, ask for a set of reviewers to verify the meaning,
   spelling, characters, and grammar of the text.

3.1.  General Usage Throughout a Document

   Where the use of non-ASCII characters is purely as part of an example
   and not otherwise required for correct protocol operation, escaping
   the non-ASCII character is not required.  Note, however, that as the
   language of the RFC Series is English, the use of non-ASCII
   characters is based on the spelling of words commonly used in the
   English language following the guidance in the Merriam-Webster
   dictionary [MerrWeb].

   The RFC Editor will use the primary spelling listed in that
   dictionary by default.

   Example of non-ASCII characters that do not require escaping (the
   example from Section 3.1.1.12 of RFC4475, with a hex dump replaced by
   the actual character glyphs) [RFC4475]:

This particular response contains unreserved and non-ascii
UTF-8 characters.
This response is well formed.  A parser must accept this message.
Message Details : unreason
SIP/2.0 200 = 2**3 * 5**2 но сто девяносто девять - простое
Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 192.0.2.198;branch=z9hG4bK1324923
Call-ID: unreason.1234ksdfak3j2erwedfsASdf
CSeq: 35 INVITE
From: sip:user@example.com;tag=11141343
To: sip:user@example.edu;tag=2229 Content-Length: 154
Content-Type: application/sdp

3.2.  Person Names

   Person names may appear in several places within an RFC.  When a
   script outside the Unicode Latin blocks is used for a person name, an
   author-provided, ASCII-only identifier will appear immediately after
   the non-Latin characters, surrounded by parentheses.  This will
   improve general readability of the text.  [UNICODE-CHART].



Flanagan                Expires October 27, 2016                [Page 4]


Internet-Draft              non-ASCII in RFCs                 April 2016


   Example for the header:


Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF)                       J. Tong
Request for Comments: 7380                                C. Bi, Ed.
Category: Standards Track                              China Telecom
ISSN: 2070-1721                                     רוני אבן (R. Even)
                                                    吴钦 (Q. Wu), Ed.
                                                            R. Huang
                                                              Huawei
                                                       November 2014


   Example for the Acknowledgements:

   OLD: The following people contributed significant text to early
   versions of this draft: Patrik Faltstrom, William Chan, and Fred
   Baker.

   PROPOSED/NEW: The following people contributed significant text to
   early versions of this draft: Patrik Fältström, 陈智昌
   (William Chan), and Fred Baker.

   Example for References:

   OLD:

      [RFC6630]  Cao, Z., Deng, H., Wu, Q., and G. Zorn, Ed., "EAP
                 Re-authentication Protocol Extensions for Authenticated
                 Anticipatory Keying (ERP/AAK)", RFC 6630, June 2012.


   NEW

   [RFC6630]  Cao, Z., Deng, H.,  吴钦 (Wu, Q.), and G. Zorn, Ed., "EAP
              Re-authentication Protocol Extensions for Authenticated
              Anticipatory Keying (ERP/AAK)", RFC 6630, June 2012.


3.3.  Company Names

   Company names may appear in several places within an RFC.  In all
   cases, valid Unicode is required.  For names that include characters
   outside of the Unicode Latin and Latin Extended script, an author-
   provided, ASCII-only identifier is required to assist in search and
   indexing of the document.


Flanagan                Expires October 27, 2016                [Page 5]


Internet-Draft              non-ASCII in RFCs                 April 2016


3.4.  Body of the Document

   When the mention of non-ASCII characters is required for correct
   protocol operation and understanding, the characters' Unicode
   character name or code point MUST be included in the text.

   o  Non-ASCII characters will require identifying the Unicode code
      point.

   o  Use of the actual UTF-8 character (e.g., Δ) is encouraged so
      that a reader can more easily see what the character is, if their
      device can render the text.

   o  The use of the Unicode character names like "INCREMENT" in
      addition to the use of Unicode code points is also encouraged.
      When used, Unicode character names should be in all capital
      letters.

   Examples:

   OLD [RFC7564]:

   However, the problem is made more serious by introducing the full
   range of Unicode code points into protocol strings.  For example,
   the characters U+13DA U+13A2 U+13B5 U+13AC U+13A2 U+13AC U+13D2 from
   the Cherokee block look similar to the ASCII characters  "STPETER" as
   they might appear when presented using a "creative" font family.

   NEW/ALLOWED:

However, the problem is made more serious by introducing the full
range of Unicode code points into protocol strings.  For example,
the characters U+13DA U+13A2 U+13B5 U+13AC U+13A2 U+13AC U+13D2
(ᏚᎢᎵᎬᎢᎬᏒ) from the Cherokee block look similar to the ASCII
characters "STPETER" as they might appear when presented using a
"creative" font family.

   ALSO ACCEPTABLE:

However, the problem is made more serious by introducing the full
range of Unicode code points into protocol strings.  For example,
the characters "ᏚᎢᎵᎬᎢᎬᏒ" (U+13DA U+13A2 U+13B5 U+13AC U+13A2
U+13AC U+13D2) from the Cherokee block look similar to the ASCII
characters "STPETER" as they might appear when presented using a
"creative" font family.

   Example of proper identification of Unicode characters in an RFC:

Flanagan                Expires October 27, 2016                [Page 6]


Internet-Draft              non-ASCII in RFCs                 April 2016


   Acceptable:

   o  Temperature changes in the Temperature Control Protocol are
      indicated by the U+2206 character.

   Preferred:

   1.  Temperature changes in the Temperature Control Protocol are
       indicated by the U+2206 character ("Δ").

   2.  Temperature changes in the Temperature Control Protocol are
       indicated by the U+2206 character (INCREMENT).

   3.  Temperature changes in the Temperature Control Protocol are
       indicated by the U+2206 character ("Δ", INCREMENT).

   4.  Temperature changes in the Temperature Control Protocol are
       indicated by the U+2206 character (INCREMENT, "Δ").

   5.  Temperature changes in the Temperature Control Protocol are
       indicated by the "Delta" character "Δ" (U+2206).

   6.  Temperature changes in the Temperature Control Protocol are
       indicated by the character "Δ" (INCREMENT, U+2206).

   Which option of (1), (2), (3), (4), (5), or (6) is preferred may
   depend on context and the specific character(s) in question.  All are
   acceptable within an RFC.  BCP 137, "ASCII Escaping of Unicode
   Character" describes the pros and cons of different options for
   identifying Unicode characters in an ASCII document BCP137 [BCP137].

3.5.  Tables

   Tables follow the same rules for identifiers and characters as in
   "Body of the Document" (Section 3.4).  If it is sensible (i.e., more
   understandable for a reader) for a given document to have two tables
   -- one including the identifiers and non-ASCII characters and a
   second with just the non-ASCII characters -- that will be allowed on
   a case-by-case basis.

   Original text from "Preparation, Enforcement, and Comparison of
   Internationalized Strings Representing Usernames and Passwords"
   [RFC7613].



Flanagan                Expires October 27, 2016                [Page 7]


Internet-Draft              non-ASCII in RFCs                 April 2016


   Table 3: A sample of legal passwords

   +------------------------------------+------------------------------+
   | # | Password                       | Notes                        |
   +------------------------------------+------------------------------+
   | 12| <correct horse battery staple> | ASCII space is allowed       |
   +------------------------------------+------------------------------+
   | 13| <Correct Horse Battery Staple> | Different from example 12    |
   +------------------------------------+------------------------------+
   | 14| <&#x3C0;&#xDF;&#xE5;>          | Non-ASCII letters are OK     |
   |   |                                | (e.g., GREEK SMALL LETTER    |
   |   |                                | PI, U+03C0)                  |
   +------------------------------------+------------------------------+
   | 15| <Jack of &#x2666;s>            | Symbols are OK (e.g., BLACK  |
   |   |                                | DIAMOND SUIT, U+2666)        |
   +------------------------------------+------------------------------+
   | 16| <foo&#x1680;bar>               | OGHAM SPACE MARK, U+1680, is |
   |   |                                | mapped to U+0020 and thus    |
   |   |                                | the full string is mapped to |
   |   |                                | <foo bar>                    |
   +------------------------------------+------------------------------+

   Preferred text:

   Table 3: A sample of legal passwords

+------------------------------------+------------------------------+
| # | Password                       | Notes                        |
+------------------------------------+------------------------------+
| 12| <correct horse battery staple> | ASCII space is allowed       |
+------------------------------------+------------------------------+
| 13| <Correct Horse Battery Staple> | Different from example 12    |
+------------------------------------+------------------------------+
| 14| <πß๗>                          | Non-ASCII letters are OK     |
|   |                                | (e.g., GREEK SMALL LETTER    |
|   |                                | PI, U+03C0; LATIN SMALL      |
|   |                                | LETTER SHARP S, U+00DF; THAI |
|   |                                | DIGIT SEVEN, U+0E57)         |
+------------------------------------+------------------------------+
| 15| <Jack of ♦s>                   | Symbols are OK (e.g., BLACK  |
|   |                                | DIAMOND SUIT, U+2666)        |
+------------------------------------+------------------------------+
| 16| <foo bar>                      | OGHAM SPACE MARK, U+1680, is |
|   |                                | mapped to U+0020 and thus    |
|   |                                | the full string is mapped to |
|   |                                | <foo bar>                    |
+------------------------------------+------------------------------+


Flanagan                Expires October 27, 2016                [Page 8]


Internet-Draft              non-ASCII in RFCs                 April 2016


3.6.  Code Components

   The RFC Editor encourages the use of the U+ notation except within a
   code component where you must follow the rules of the programming
   language in which you are writing the code.

   Code components are generally expected to use fixed-width fonts.
   Where such fonts are not available for a particular script, the best
   script- appropriate font will be used for that part of the code
   component.

3.7.  Bibliographic Text

   The reference entry must be in English; whatever subfields are
   present must be available in ASCII-encoded characters.  For
   references to RFCs and Internet Drafts, the author's name will be
   included in the reference as listed on the front header of the RFC or
   Internet Draft.  As long as good sense is used, the reference entry
   may also include non-ASCII characters at the author's discretion and
   as provided by the author.  The RFC Editor may request a review of
   any non-ASCII reference entry.  This applies to both normative and
   informative references.

   Example:

[GOST3410] "Information technology. Cryptographic data security.
           Signature and verification processes of [electronic]
           digital signature.", GOST R 34.10-2001, Gosudarstvennyi
           Standard of Russian Federation, Government Committee of
           Russia for Standards, 2001. (In Russian)

Allowable addition to the above citation:
           "Информационная технология. Криптографическая защита
           информации. Процессы формирования и проверки
           электронной цифровой подписи", GOST R 34.10-2001,
           Государственный стандарт Российской Федерации, 2001.


Alternatively:
[GOST3410] "Information technology. Cryptographic data security.
           Signature and verification processes of [electronic]
           digital signature.", GOST R 34.10-2001, Gosudarstvennyi
           Standard of Russian Federation, Правительственная комиссия
           России по стандартам (Government Committee of
           Russia for Standards), 2001. (In Russian)



Flanagan                Expires October 27, 2016                [Page 9]


Internet-Draft              non-ASCII in RFCs                 April 2016


3.8.  Keywords and Citation Tags

   Keywords (as tagged with the <keyword> element in XML), and citation
   tags (as defined in the anchor attributes of <reference> elements)
   must be ASCII only.

3.9.  Address Information

   The purpose of providing address information, either postal or
   e-mail, is to assist readers of an RFC to contact the author or
   authors.  Authors may include the official postal address as
   recognized by their company or local postal service without
   additional non-ASCII character escapes.  If the email address
   includes non-ASCII characters and is a valid email address at the
   time of publication, non-ASCII character escapes are not required.

   Example:

     Qin Wu (editor)
     Huawei
     101 Software Avenue, Yuhua District
     Nanjing, Jiangsu  210012
     China

   Alternate contact information:
     吴钦 (editor)
     华为技术有限公司
     雨花区软件大道101号
     江苏南京 210012
     中国

   ------

     Roni Even
     Huawei
     14 David Hamelech
     Tel Aviv  64953
     Israel

   Alternate contact information:
   רוני אבן
  וואווי
  דוד המלך 14
  תל אביב 64953
  ישראל



Flanagan                Expires October 27, 2016               [Page 10]


Internet-Draft              non-ASCII in RFCs                 April 2016


4.  Normalization Forms

   Authors should not expect normalization forms to be preserved.  If a
   particular normalization form is expected, note that in the text of
   the RFC.

5.  XML Markup

   As described above, use of non-ASCII characters in areas such as
   email, company name, addresses, and name is allowed.  In order to
   make it easier for code to identify the appropriate ASCII
   alternatives, authors must include an "ascii" attribute to their XML
   markup when an ASCII alternative is required.  See [I-D.iab-xml2rfc]
   for more detail on how to tag ASCII alternatives.

6.  IANA Considerations

   This document makes no request of IANA.

   Note to RFC Editor: this section may be removed on publication as an
   RFC.

7.  Internationalization Considerations

   The ability to use non-ASCII characters in RFCs in a clear and
   consistent manner will improve the ability to describe
   internationalized protocols and will recognize the diversity of
   authors.  However, the goal of readability will override the use of
   non-ASCII characters within the text.

8.  Security Considerations

   Valid Unicode that matches the expected text must be verified in
   order to preserve expected behavior and protocol information.

9.  Change log - to be removed by the RFC Editor

9.1.  draft-iab-rfc-nonascii-01 to -02

   Authors, Contributors: section renamed "Person names", text
   simplified, example of a reference added.

   Bibliographic Text: added an alternate example for a reference with
   non-ASCII characters.




Flanagan                Expires October 27, 2016               [Page 11]


Internet-Draft              non-ASCII in RFCs                 April 2016


9.2.  draft-iab-rfc-nonascii-00 to -01

   Code Components: added fixed-width font clarification

   Authors, Bibliographic info: Clarified requirements for full name,
   how name will be displayed

9.3.  draft-flanagan-nonascii to draft-iab-rfc-nonascii-00

   Changed requirement for all nonASCII names (including company names)
   to require an ASCII equivalent to requiring it only for non-Latin
   characters.  Extended Latin is also acceptable without an ASCII
   equivalent.

9.4.  -04 to -05

   Keywords: expanded section to include citation tags.

   Internationalization considerations: reiterated that the use of non-
   ASCII characters is not automatically guaranteed.

9.5.  -04 to -05

   Introduction: added statement regarding document subject to change.

   Tables: added example.

   Code: removed placeholder for example.

9.6.  -02 to -04

   Introduction and Abstract: change to be clearer about what/why non-
   ASCII characters are being allowed.

   XML Markup: section added.

10.  References

   [BCP137]   Klensin, J., "ASCII Escaping of Unicode Characters",
              BCP 137, RFC 5137, February 2008,
              <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/bcp137>.

   [I-D.iab-xml2rfc]
              Hoffman, P., "The "xml2rfc" version 3 Vocabulary", draft-
              iab-xml2rfc-03 (work in progress), February 2016.

   [MerrWeb]  Merriam-Webster,Inc., "Merriam-Webster's Collegiate
              Dictionary, 11th Edition", 2009.



Flanagan                Expires October 27, 2016               [Page 12]


Internet-Draft              non-ASCII in RFCs                 April 2016


   [RFC0020]  Cerf, V., "ASCII format for network interchange", STD 80,
              RFC 20, DOI 10.17487/RFC0020, October 1969,
              <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc20>.

   [RFC3550]  Schulzrinne, H., Casner, S., Frederick, R., and V.
              Jacobson, "RTP: A Transport Protocol for Real-Time
              Applications", STD 64, RFC 3550, DOI 10.17487/RFC3550,
              July 2003, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3550>.

   [RFC4475]  Sparks, R., Ed., Hawrylyshen, A., Johnston, A., Rosenberg,
              J., and H. Schulzrinne, "Session Initiation Protocol (SIP)
              Torture Test Messages", RFC 4475, DOI 10.17487/RFC4475,
              May 2006, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4475>.

   [RFC6949]  Flanagan, H. and N. Brownlee, "RFC Series Format
              Requirements and Future Development", RFC 6949,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC6949, May 2013,
              <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6949>.

   [RFC7322]  Flanagan, H. and S. Ginoza, "RFC Style Guide", RFC 7322,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC7322, September 2014,
              <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7322>.

   [RFC7564]  Saint-Andre, P. and M. Blanchet, "PRECIS Framework:
              Preparation, Enforcement, and Comparison of
              Internationalized Strings in Application Protocols",
              RFC 7564, DOI 10.17487/RFC7564, May 2015,
              <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7564>.

   [RFC7613]  Saint-Andre, P. and A. Melnikov, "Preparation,
              Enforcement, and Comparison of Internationalized Strings
              Representing Usernames and Passwords", RFC 7613,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC7613, August 2015,
              <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7613>.

   [UNICODE-CHART]
              The Unicode Consortium, "The Unicode Standard",
              2014-present, <http://www.unicode.org/charts>.

   [UnicodeCurrent]
              The Unicode Consortium, "The Unicode Standard",
              2014-present, <http://www.unicode.org/versions/latest/>.

Appendix A.  Acknowledgements

   With many thanks to the members of the IAB i18n program and the RFC
   Format Design Team.


Flanagan                Expires October 27, 2016               [Page 13]


Internet-Draft              non-ASCII in RFCs                 April 2016


Author's Address

   Heather Flanagan (editor)
   RFC Editor

   Email: rse@rfc-editor.org
   URI:   http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2647-2220








































Flanagan                Expires October 27, 2016               [Page 14]


Html markup produced by rfcmarkup 1.124, available from https://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcmarkup/