IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [kitten] Review of draft-ietf-kitten-krb-service-discovery-00

Greg Hudson <ghudson@mit.edu> Thu, 23 March 2017 17:06 UTC

Return-Path: <ghudson@mit.edu>
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 D00ED129A6C for <kitten@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 23 Mar 2017 10:06:52 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.221
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.221 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, UNPARSEABLE_RELAY=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 1tLClcDpzkiq for <kitten@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 23 Mar 2017 10:06:51 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from dmz-mailsec-scanner-5.mit.edu (dmz-mailsec-scanner-5.mit.edu [18.7.68.34]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 62369129A04 for <kitten@ietf.org>; Thu, 23 Mar 2017 10:06:51 -0700 (PDT)
X-AuditID: 12074422-903ff70000006fe7-63-58d400a998f1
Received: from mailhub-auth-1.mit.edu ( [18.9.21.35]) (using TLS with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by (Symantec Messaging Gateway) with SMTP id 80.D7.28647.9A004D85; Thu, 23 Mar 2017 13:06:50 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from outgoing.mit.edu (outgoing-auth-1.mit.edu [18.9.28.11]) by mailhub-auth-1.mit.edu (8.13.8/8.9.2) with ESMTP id v2NH6m2w018319; Thu, 23 Mar 2017 13:06:49 -0400
Received: from [18.101.8.226] (vpn-18-101-8-226.mit.edu [18.101.8.226]) (authenticated bits=0) (User authenticated as ghudson@ATHENA.MIT.EDU) by outgoing.mit.edu (8.13.8/8.12.4) with ESMTP id v2NH6kcW028061 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NOT); Thu, 23 Mar 2017 13:06:47 -0400
To: "Henry B (Hank) Hotz, CISSP" <hbhotz@oxy.edu>
References: <x7dzige39sj.fsf@equal-rites.mit.edu> <3FD27BFF-5090-4505-852C-E8766BBAA93B@oxy.edu>
Cc: kitten@ietf.org
From: Greg Hudson <ghudson@mit.edu>
Message-ID: <e9ccafcf-55e9-72e2-3129-c681a7920dfd@mit.edu>
Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2017 13:06:46 -0400
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.5.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <3FD27BFF-5090-4505-852C-E8766BBAA93B@oxy.edu>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFvrKIsWRmVeSWpSXmKPExsUixCmqrLuK4UqEwer74hYf7y1ksTi6eRWL A5PHkiU/mTy2Nv1lDmCK4rJJSc3JLEst0rdL4MqY+ewnW8FvtopDE58xNzCeYu1i5OSQEDCR OLnmAyOILSTQxiSxcr9RFyMXkL2RUaJ1wWM2iMRRJon7jRwgtrCAl8TjKUtZQGwRAUOJ6Ssn Ag3iAKpJknjeYAESZhYQlli+5ixYK5uAssT6/VvBynkFrCT+rj7MDGKzCKhK3OyfxATSKioQ IdFwOB2iRFDi5MwnYOWcAtYSj25OY4QYqS7xZ94lZghbXmL72znMExgFZiFpmYWkbBaSsgWM zKsYZVNyq3RzEzNzilOTdYuTE/PyUot0TfVyM0v0UlNKNzGCQpTdRWkH48R/XocYBTgYlXh4 I2suRQixJpYVV+YeYpTkYFIS5XXceTlCiC8pP6UyI7E4I76oNCe1+BCjBAezkgjv49dAOd6U xMqq1KJ8mJQ0B4uSOK+4RmOEkEB6YklqdmpqQWoRTFaGg0NJglcDGItCgkWp6akVaZk5JQhp Jg5OkOE8QMMlQWp4iwsSc4sz0yHypxh1OW4cP/CGSYglLz8vVUqcV+0/0AUCIEUZpXlwc8Cp JZXj0StGcaC3hHl3g1TxANMS3KRXQEuYgJaU7bkAsqQkESEl1cCouqNdUNc34sb1mdM7f1kx Kx68aCqoYJxmItHtPY3xZkDvkm/TS3nt3XPi3W7Y7bukziF0xjDIcMJM4bknTJYFrexr0j8v VGtY2dm8b8XdKzEtX8z5/32M8tzdXzfx8NP8k7unff9rzcFf0zQpNsf6pzPzNIE752JypHi/ lG+N/a5/O2X36a9KLMUZiYZazEXFiQBnf0GyCAMAAA==
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/kitten/gxBi_cXyB20dC695A9okXn3eqGg>
Subject: Re: [kitten] Review of draft-ietf-kitten-krb-service-discovery-00
X-BeenThere: kitten@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
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: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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, 23 Mar 2017 17:06:53 -0000

On 03/21/2017 04:16 PM, Henry B (Hank) Hotz, CISSP wrote:
> Mildly disagree. 
> 
> Mainly because there is RFC 6860.

I think Hank meant RFC 6880 (KDC Information Model), to answer Jeffrey
Altman's question.

I will argue that in complexity, a discovery mechanism is small, an
information model is medium, and an administrative protocol is large.  I
argued that the URI discovery draft creates:

  [discovery] -> <empty void of no admin protocol>

Adding RFC 6860 into the mix just changes the picture to:

  [disc] -> <empty void of no admin protocol> -> [info model]

They don't connect up, and the missing piece is much larger than the
pieces on either side.  As there is no indication that a complete
picture is forthcoming, I believe that any DNS discovery protocol for
the implementation-specific admin service should also be considered
implementation-specific.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email