Re: [kitten] On stream-based GSSContext methods in RFC 5653

Weijun Wang <weijun.wang@oracle.com> Thu, 19 March 2015 03:00 UTC

Return-Path: <weijun.wang@oracle.com>
X-Original-To: kitten@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: kitten@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 433DF1A8547 for <kitten@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 18 Mar 2015 20:00:10 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.211
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.211 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id AwRLpFF2Sxlr for <kitten@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 18 Mar 2015 20:00:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from userp1040.oracle.com (userp1040.oracle.com [156.151.31.81]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 912A01A802A for <kitten@ietf.org>; Wed, 18 Mar 2015 20:00:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ucsinet21.oracle.com (ucsinet21.oracle.com [156.151.31.93]) by userp1040.oracle.com (Sentrion-MTA-4.3.2/Sentrion-MTA-4.3.2) with ESMTP id t2J303hs021092 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Thu, 19 Mar 2015 03:00:04 GMT
Received: from aserv0122.oracle.com (aserv0122.oracle.com [141.146.126.236]) by ucsinet21.oracle.com (8.14.4+Sun/8.14.4) with ESMTP id t2J2vAje008349 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Thu, 19 Mar 2015 02:57:11 GMT
Received: from abhmp0019.oracle.com (abhmp0019.oracle.com [141.146.116.25]) by aserv0122.oracle.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id t2J2vA7Z013795; Thu, 19 Mar 2015 02:57:10 GMT
Received: from [192.168.10.107] (/114.250.174.244) by default (Oracle Beehive Gateway v4.0) with ESMTP ; Wed, 18 Mar 2015 19:57:10 -0700
Message-ID: <550A3AF9.4020701@oracle.com>
Date: Thu, 19 Mar 2015 10:56:57 +0800
From: Weijun Wang <weijun.wang@oracle.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.3; WOW64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.5.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Nico Williams <nico@cryptonector.com>
References: <54CEE8E5.5080701@oracle.com> <54D2FCD5.6060404@oracle.com> <54D3190D.8080003@mit.edu> <54D31FD0.9030508@oracle.com> <54D39523.5070700@mit.edu> <54D404FE.8010009@oracle.com> <54D40D6A.7010704@mit.edu> <54D4100E.7070200@oracle.com> <alpine.GSO.1.10.1502061704130.3953@multics.mit.edu> <A3256456-DACB-44B3-B614-599640744405@oracle.com> <20150319023703.GA8099@localhost>
In-Reply-To: <20150319023703.GA8099@localhost>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Source-IP: ucsinet21.oracle.com [156.151.31.93]
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/kitten/0OqZxBX_9zXdCQu7PnbxvZbnPvA>
Cc: kitten@ietf.org, Thomas.Maslen@software.dell.com, OpenJDK Dev list <security-dev@openjdk.java.net>
Subject: Re: [kitten] On stream-based GSSContext methods in RFC 5653
X-BeenThere: kitten@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: Common Authentication Technologies - Next Generation <kitten.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/kitten>, <mailto:kitten-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/kitten/>
List-Post: <mailto:kitten@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:kitten-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/kitten>, <mailto:kitten-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 19 Mar 2015 03:00:10 -0000

So what's your suggestion on their future?

A: Remove them and say "they are removed" in a "Changed since" section.

B: Move them to an appendix and say "they will not be developed anymore 
and please do not use them".

C: Keep them in the old section and say "they will not be developed 
anymore and please do not use them".

Thanks
Max

On 3/19/2015 10:37, Nico Williams wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 16, 2015 at 11:46:46AM +0800, Wang Weijun wrote:
>> I discussed with my colleagues on the stream-based methods and we
>> think they are not well-designed:
>
> I agree.
>