IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [kitten] [Ietf-krb-wg] Channel bindings -- interop issue with GSS_C_AF_*

Nico Williams <nico@cryptonector.com> Wed, 08 June 2011 17:16 UTC

Return-Path: <nico@cryptonector.com>
X-Original-To: kitten@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: kitten@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 75A9821F8582 for <kitten@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 8 Jun 2011 10:16:31 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.149
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.149 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-1.172, BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 12mi3skrvRAV for <kitten@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 8 Jun 2011 10:16:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from homiemail-a33.g.dreamhost.com (caiajhbdccac.dreamhost.com [208.97.132.202]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D31A321F8581 for <kitten@ietf.org>; Wed, 8 Jun 2011 10:16:30 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from homiemail-a33.g.dreamhost.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by homiemail-a33.g.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A6716594074 for <kitten@ietf.org>; Wed, 8 Jun 2011 10:16:30 -0700 (PDT)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=cryptonector.com; h=mime-version :in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to:cc: content-type; q=dns; s=cryptonector.com; b=VlW0h2B92rcFv5wOH31z/ FmPhyDvEwvRUN3Pxz9V01Y5llR/QyU8LYEZuKwsMSdrvpku73/zVNH/hXyScJe5O DJzoZ/AhgZ/i5ueFum63ck9Ml1+x/jFHpaNVYU+QiKhbaJNlbLOnWaeVoZYgFl9J x83AJjUmmF5M47EpkM16lU=
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=cryptonector.com; h= mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from :to:cc:content-type; s=cryptonector.com; bh=//B5KwKMeSXqGHicIMaN 3EARXY8=; b=HlywK1JOgthGjB4KiTHA7W+0NrDHcADDiif18sy1fahDfWXMCHSA aM/7nLAMZ6bL33xohVW/k4isVbOdgmAHPnXcm9vKDJ6dmive3WCcN9TnE96wAFBT AJzKxB7BsvbwopkzWIyS5UhFVwx803N8qVWUUl8f++HYd/TiiEQ8f1Y=
Received: from mail-pz0-f44.google.com (mail-pz0-f44.google.com [209.85.210.44]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: nico@cryptonector.com) by homiemail-a33.g.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 78DA2594071 for <kitten@ietf.org>; Wed, 8 Jun 2011 10:16:30 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by pzk5 with SMTP id 5so381491pzk.31 for <kitten@ietf.org>; Wed, 08 Jun 2011 10:16:30 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.68.20.137 with SMTP id n9mr906728pbe.121.1307553390133; Wed, 08 Jun 2011 10:16:30 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.68.50.39 with HTTP; Wed, 8 Jun 2011 10:16:30 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <tslvcwg2rdo.fsf@mit.edu>
References: <201106071831.p57IVNmb010502@fs4113.wdf.sap.corp> <201106071900.p57J0uCN012135@fs4113.wdf.sap.corp> <D5847DD823005F4E9DB94FE77DCEDF680FEE75C2@ALVMBXW01.prod.quest.corp> <87oc29xrtn.fsf@latte.josefsson.org> <BANLkTinvrZioQjwgqy9_jmFqHFvFMyCyaw@mail.gmail.com> <tslvcwg2rdo.fsf@mit.edu>
Date: Wed, 08 Jun 2011 12:16:30 -0500
Message-ID: <BANLkTimy2ZQCHc6JUK4GaaxJj8BSHfJymA@mail.gmail.com>
From: Nico Williams <nico@cryptonector.com>
To: Sam Hartman <hartmans-ietf@mit.edu>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Cc: kitten@ietf.org, Simon Josefsson <simon@josefsson.org>, "ietf-krb-wg@anl.gov" <ietf-krb-wg@anl.gov>
Subject: Re: [kitten] [Ietf-krb-wg] Channel bindings -- interop issue with GSS_C_AF_*
X-BeenThere: kitten@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
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: Wed, 08 Jun 2011 17:16:31 -0000

Another possibility is that we fix only RFC5554 to say that when null
addresses are provided then the address families must be a specific
one and that mechanisms must coerce those to that one specific family
if the application supplied the wrong one.  We then need only
determine which one Windows is using now.

Nico
--

v2.46.0 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status