Re: Last Call: 'TLS User Mapping Extension' to Proposed Standard
Simon Josefsson <jas@extundo.com> Thu, 30 March 2006 16:00 UTC
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1FOzZm-0003QM-P4; Thu, 30 Mar 2006 11:00:46 -0500
Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1FOzZl-0003Q8-Jy for ietf@ietf.org; Thu, 30 Mar 2006 11:00:45 -0500
Received: from 178.230.13.217.in-addr.dgcsystems.net ([217.13.230.178] helo=yxa.extundo.com) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1FOzZk-00038G-0g for ietf@ietf.org; Thu, 30 Mar 2006 11:00:45 -0500
Received: from localhost.localdomain (yxa.extundo.com [217.13.230.178]) (authenticated bits=0) by yxa.extundo.com (8.13.4/8.13.4/Debian-3sarge1) with ESMTP id k2UG0aUJ002139 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Thu, 30 Mar 2006 18:00:37 +0200
From: Simon Josefsson <jas@extundo.com>
To: ietf@ietf.org
References: <E1FOykl-00006J-6s@stiedprstage1.ietf.org>
OpenPGP: id=B565716F; url=http://josefsson.org/key.txt
X-Hashcash: 1:21:060330:ietf-announce@ietf.org::iZ+k8VEVG6/5orTL:3Qul
X-Hashcash: 1:21:060330:iesg@ietf.org::80uWWbyXtFmz+Q6s:Bhn1
X-Hashcash: 1:21:060330:ietf@ietf.org::DN0Gu8/odVWQSoGU:5ZvG
Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2006 18:00:36 +0200
In-Reply-To: <E1FOykl-00006J-6s@stiedprstage1.ietf.org> (The IESG's message of "Thu, 30 Mar 2006 10:08:03 -0500")
Message-ID: <877j6borbv.fsf@latte.josefsson.org>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.110004 (No Gnus v0.4) Emacs/22.0.50 (gnu/linux)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.5 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00, FORGED_RCVD_HELO autolearn=ham version=3.1.0
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.0 (2005-09-13) on yxa-iv
X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV version 0.88, clamav-milter version 0.87 on yxa.extundo.com
X-Virus-Status: Clean
X-Spam-Score: 0.1 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: 769a46790fb42fbb0b0cc700c82f7081
Subject: Re: Last Call: 'TLS User Mapping Extension' to Proposed Standard
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: ietf-bounces@ietf.org
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-santesson-tls-ume-04.txt says: This document does not specify how the server stores the user_principal_name, or how exactly it might be used to locate a certificate. For instance, it might be appropriate to do a case- insensitive lookup. It is RECOMMENDED that the server processes the user_principal_name with a stringprep profile [N7] appropriate for the identity in question, such as Nameprep [N8] for the portion domain portion of UPN, SASLprep [N9] for the user portion of the UPN and stringprep appendix B.3 [N7] as mapping table for case folding. Given that the first and second sentence make it clear that the use of StringPrep is not required, I suggest using MAY instead of RECOMMENDED in the third sentence. RECOMMENDED is the same as SHOULD according to RFC 2119, and is a fairly strong recommendation. Its use seem misplaced here. It may be better to avoid RFC 2119 language completely here, because the entire paragraph is merely an example of what you can do. Thanks, Simon The IESG <iesg-secretary@ietf.org> writes: > The IESG has received a request from an individual submitter to consider the > following documents: > > - 'TLS User Mapping Extension' > <draft-santesson-tls-ume-04.txt> as a Proposed Standard > - 'TLS Handshake Message for Supplemental Data' > <draft-santesson-tls-supp-00.txt> as a Proposed Standard > > The previous Last Call on draft-santesson-tls-ume-03.txt has finished. > However, to resolve some comments that were received during the > previous Last Call, the document has been updated and > draft-santesson-tls-supp-00.txt was written. Due to the significant > changes in one area of the document, the IESG is making a second > call for comments. This comment period is shorter since the majority > of the document is unchanged. > > The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and solicits > final comments on this action. Please send any comments to the > iesg@ietf.org or ietf@ietf.org mailing lists by 2006-04-11. > > The file can be obtained via > http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-santesson-tls-ume-04.txt > http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-santesson-tls-supp-00.txt _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
- Re: Last Call: 'TLS User Mapping Extension' to Pr… Eric Rescorla
- Re: Last Call: 'TLS User Mapping Extension' to Pr… Steven M. Bellovin
- Re: Last Call: 'TLS User Mapping Extension' to Pr… Bill Fenner
- Re: Last Call: 'TLS User Mapping Extension' to Pr… Russ Housley
- Re: Last Call: 'TLS User Mapping Extension' to Pr… Russ Housley
- Is round-trip time no longer a concern? (was: Re:… Dave Crocker
- Re: Is round-trip time no longer a concern? Russ Allbery
- Re: Is round-trip time no longer a concern? (was:… Steven M. Bellovin
- Re: Last Call: 'TLS User Mapping Extension' to Pr… Bill Strahm
- Re: Is round-trip time no longer a concern? (was:… Dave Cridland
- Re: Is round-trip time no longer a concern? Harald Tveit Alvestrand
- Re: Is round-trip time no longer a concern? Peter Dambier
- RE: Last Call: 'TLS User Mapping Extension' to Pr… Pasi.Eronen
- Re: Is round-trip time no longer a concern? Eric Rescorla
- Re: Is round-trip time no longer a concern? Keith Moore
- Re: Is round-trip time no longer a concern? Dave Cridland
- Re: Is round-trip time no longer a concern? Dave Crocker
- Re: Is round-trip time no longer a concern? Eric Rescorla
- Re: Is round-trip time no longer a concern? Tony Finch
- Re: Is round-trip time no longer a concern? Steven M. Bellovin
- Re: Is round-trip time no longer a concern? Dave Crocker
- RE: Last Call: 'TLS User Mapping Extension' to Pr… Gray, Eric
- RE: [TLS] Re: Last Call: 'TLS User Mapping Extens… Pasi.Eronen
- Re: Last Call: 'TLS User Mapping Extension' to Pr… Bernard Aboba
- RE: Last Call: 'TLS User Mapping Extension' to Pr… Russ Housley
- RE: [TLS] Re: Last Call: 'TLS User Mapping Extens… Russ Housley
- RE: [TLS] Re: Last Call: 'TLS User Mapping Extens… Stefan Santesson
- RE: Last Call: 'TLS User Mapping Extension' to Pr… Stefan Santesson
- RE: Last Call: 'TLS User Mapping Extension' to Pr… Stefan Santesson
- RE: Re: [TLS] Re: Last Call: 'TLS User Mapping Ex… Stefan Santesson
- RE: Re: [TLS] Re: Last Call: 'TLS User Mapping Ex… Stefan Santesson
- RE: Re: [TLS] Re: Last Call: 'TLS User Mapping Ex… Russ Housley
- Re: Last Call: 'TLS User Mapping Extension' to Pr… Simon Josefsson
- Re: Last Call: 'TLS User Mapping Extension' to Pr… Jeffrey Hutzelman
- RE: [TLS] Re: Last Call: 'TLS User Mapping Extens… Ari Medvinsky