Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-kitten-gssapi-channel-bindings-06.txt

[Brian E Carpenter <[e-mail]>]

Nico,

The paragraph is identical in the -05 and -06 drafts,
so no, actually you didn't change anything after my review.
I still find the text a little unclear.

I don't feel strongly about this; Russ has just logged it
as a comment, so it's up to you and Tim whether to change
anything.

    Brian

On 2009-04-07 03:42, Nicolas Williams wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 06, 2009 at 10:35:23AM -0500, Nicolas Williams wrote:
>> On Sun, Apr 05, 2009 at 10:30:21AM +1200, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
>>> Summary: Almost ready; needs one clarification.
>>>
>>> Comments: 
>>>
>>> I was expecting the sentence quoted below to be updated
>>> following Nico's comments on my Last Call comment. I think the new
>>> text would be
>>>
>>>     Where the language binding of the GSS-API model's channel bindings is as 
>>>     single OCTET STRINGs (or the language's equivalent), then the implementation
>>>     SHOULD assume that the given bindings correspond only to the
>>>     application-data field of GSS-CHANNEL-BINDINGS as shown above.
>> Oops, sorry I missed that edit.  I'll submit a revised I-D shortly --
>> I'll s/is as/is as a/.
> 
> Er, no, I did update that.  I replaced the above with:
> 
>    Where a language binding of the GSS-API models channel bindings as
>    OCTET STRINGs (or the language's equivalent), then the implementation
>    MUST assume that the given bindings correspond only to the
>    application-data field of GSS-CHANNEL-BINDINGS as shown above, rather
>    than some encoding of GSS-CHANNEL-BINDINGS.
> 
> I think that's clearer.
> 
> Nico