IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [apps-discuss] AppsDir review of draft-ietf-krb-wg-kdc-model

Tobias Gondrom <tobias.gondrom@gondrom.org> Tue, 05 June 2012 12:29 UTC

Return-Path: <tobias.gondrom@gondrom.org>
X-Original-To: apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2065B21F8667 for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 5 Jun 2012 05:29:21 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -96.778
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-96.778 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, FH_HELO_EQ_D_D_D_D=1.597, HELO_DYNAMIC_IPADDR=2.426, HELO_EQ_DE=0.35, HELO_MISMATCH_DE=1.448, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 120kCDZ5EUgR for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 5 Jun 2012 05:29:20 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lvps83-169-7-107.dedicated.hosteurope.de (www.gondrom.org [83.169.7.107]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1517521F8682 for <apps-discuss@ietf.org>; Tue, 5 Jun 2012 05:29:19 -0700 (PDT)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=default; d=gondrom.org; b=eLCr7yyin+9+8xgw2IO4lQwZJDmL3ky0Ql2O0dRAN2az87Erq9NC/YdKXoPw2ebH27gLF0tsYQm2b5GBm6ci0462qXxq/zSeGSgIT0/hs6Q3sMTT0VCMZ6uCmRCp0tbb; h=Received:Received:Message-ID:Date:From:User-Agent:MIME-Version:To:CC:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:Content-Type;
Received: (qmail 19612 invoked from network); 5 Jun 2012 14:29:17 +0200
Received: from 94-194-102-93.zone8.bethere.co.uk (HELO ?192.168.1.69?) (94.194.102.93) by www.gondrom.org with (DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA encrypted) SMTP; 5 Jun 2012 14:29:17 +0200
Message-ID: <4FCDFB9D.1020804@gondrom.org>
Date: Tue, 05 Jun 2012 13:29:17 +0100
From: Tobias Gondrom <tobias.gondrom@gondrom.org>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:12.0) Gecko/20120430 Thunderbird/12.0.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: leifj@mnt.se
References: <4FCCC936.3030600@gondrom.org> <tsl1ulvdq0a.fsf@mit.edu> <4FCCE496.1030800@gondrom.org> <4FCD0562.10300@sunet.se> <4FCDED3C.80300@gondrom.org> <4FCDF6D9.3070309@mnt.se>
In-Reply-To: <4FCDF6D9.3070309@mnt.se>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------020705050509040605090508"
Cc: ietf-krb-wg@anl.gov, apps-discuss@ietf.org, iesg@ietf.org, draft-ietf-krb-wg-kdc-model.all@tools.ietf.org, hartmans-ietf@mit.edu, jhutz@cmu.edu
Subject: Re: [apps-discuss] AppsDir review of draft-ietf-krb-wg-kdc-model
X-BeenThere: apps-discuss@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: General discussion of application-layer protocols <apps-discuss.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/apps-discuss>, <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/apps-discuss>
List-Post: <mailto:apps-discuss@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss>, <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 05 Jun 2012 12:29:21 -0000

On 05/06/12 13:08, Leif Johansson wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
>
>> To me this reads that, first the schemas will not have direct
> Correct. Direct interoperability between (say) XML schema and
> LDAP schema is not a useful goal. The fact that they represent
> the same underlying model is.
>
> Does that clarify things?
>
> 	Cheers Leif
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)
> Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/
>
> iEYEARECAAYFAk/N9tUACgkQ8Jx8FtbMZneLbwCgsX+Zi9/noL1o3Q/1hhpOVhBh
> eN8An17oppZSQn6lzfhmfSyqR4EJMkRw
> =s/FA
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Thank you for the confirmation.
Question: In the light of this, why does the ID aim for Standards Track 
(and not for Informational)?

Best regards, Tobias

v2.26.15 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status