Hi. The Unicode/ SASLprep discussion in a different thread notwithstanding, I favor approval of this document. However, as an editorial matter, Appendix A points to two expired I-Ds, draft-ietf-sasl-digest-to-historic and draft-ietf-sasl-crammd5-to-historic. Expired I-Ds are notoriously hard to find, especially since the practice of the RFC Editor has been to delete the file names, treating them as "works in progress" even though there is no expectation of further progress. I would encourage the WG to review this appendix and decide whether those references are actually useful. If they are not, they should be removed. If they are, it seems to me to be worthwhile to pull the explanatory / "list of problems" material out of those I-Ds and publish an Informational document that might be titled "Issues with Some Older SASL Mechanisms" (or words to that effect) so that it could be referenced usefully. john _______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf