IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [CHANNEL-BINDING] Re: draft-ietf-sasl-gs2 AD review comments

"Jeffrey Hutzelman" <jhutz@cmu.edu> Wed, 10 October 2007 01:07 UTC

Return-path: <channel-binding-bounces@ietf.org>
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IfQ2b-0006Iv-4i; Tue, 09 Oct 2007 21:07:13 -0400
Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IfQ2Z-0006GI-EC for channel-binding@ietf.org; Tue, 09 Oct 2007 21:07:11 -0400
Received: from jackfruit.srv.cs.cmu.edu ([128.2.201.16]) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IfQ2Z-0006ys-41 for channel-binding@ietf.org; Tue, 09 Oct 2007 21:07:11 -0400
Received: from [68.247.78.113] (000-217-534.area3.spcsdns.net [68.247.78.113]) (authenticated bits=0) by jackfruit.srv.cs.cmu.edu (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id l9A15vhb000881 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DES-CBC3-SHA bits=168 verify=NO); Tue, 9 Oct 2007 21:06:21 -0400 (EDT)
From: Jeffrey Hutzelman <jhutz@cmu.edu>
Subject: Re: [CHANNEL-BINDING] Re: draft-ietf-sasl-gs2 AD review comments
Date: Tue, 09 Oct 2007 21:07:00 -0400
To: hartmans-ietf@mit.edu
X-Mailer: ChatterEmail+ for Treo 6xx/700p (3.0.8)
Message-ID: <3274808827.15922136@smtp.srv.cs.cmu.edu>
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: 9182cfff02fae4f1b6e9349e01d62f32
Cc: channel-binding@ietf.org, ietf-sasl@imc.org, Nicolas.Williams@sun.com
X-BeenThere: channel-binding@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussion of channel binding IANA registry requests and specifications <channel-binding.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/channel-binding>, <mailto:channel-binding-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/channel-binding>
List-Post: <mailto:channel-binding@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:channel-binding-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/channel-binding>, <mailto:channel-binding-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: channel-binding-bounces@ietf.org

Fine; I don't have any particular reason to prefer nul.  But, why not; what problem are you concerned about?


-----Original Message-----
From: Sam Hartman <hartmans-ietf@mit.edu>
Date: Tuesday, Oct 9, 2007 8:48 pm
Subject: Re: [CHANNEL-BINDING] Re: draft-ietf-sasl-gs2 AD review comments
To: Jeffrey Hutzelman <jhutz@cmu.edu>
CC: Nicolas Williams <Nicolas.Williams@sun.com>, channel-binding@ietf.org,        ietf-sasl@imc.org

>>>>> "Jeffrey" == Jeffrey Hutzelman <jhutz@cmu.edu> writes:
>
>    Jeffrey> On Tuesday, October 09, 2007 04:25:16 PM -0500 Nicolas
>
>    Jeffrey> I'm inclined to specify that all protocols should work
>    Jeffrey> the same way, transporting a single octet string which
>    Jeffrey> consists of the prefix, followed by a NUL octet, followed
>    Jeffrey> by the actual binding data.
>
>Please don't use nul; use : or something like that and forbid that
>character from prefixes.
>
>
>


_______________________________________________
CHANNEL-BINDING mailing list
CHANNEL-BINDING@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/channel-binding

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email