Re: [kitten] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC6680 (4337)

Kathleen Moriarty <kathleen.moriarty.ietf@gmail.com> Tue, 21 April 2015 00:19 UTC

Return-Path: <kathleen.moriarty.ietf@gmail.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 CDD601B35AE for <kitten@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 20 Apr 2015 17:19:13 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] 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 x7g79q2nHJxM for <kitten@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 20 Apr 2015 17:19:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-qc0-x22e.google.com (mail-qc0-x22e.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c01::22e]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3BDB11B35A9 for <kitten@ietf.org>; Mon, 20 Apr 2015 17:19:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by qcpm10 with SMTP id m10so68196745qcp.3 for <kitten@ietf.org>; Mon, 20 Apr 2015 17:19:11 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=from:content-type:mime-version:subject:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=GIciiKYNUM9+ZXxwm7cmV7AJUuwovRLo3CP4pmcrLiA=; b=m9cQEBvHovHn9oOSrf75KzRvDwFKjYzKTcz1TQrqOBEG1xW6LMQepw/JuqN9Jughrt tFgrzy+GbF9bAm8mzhM5Fbs3VStoOvgZP6lTihQzbosovpkbZjBBNQisJKsXKw9WrYCA aIDTaHsMHHMY+KV192/P+khlktjBWYinTLkgdingvbXJb9msYd2chDiaXf9llAkwHBxc GjVB+d5Pb+BBAFPm6gAHVa2VoJZ107KdsOWUVMbXd0ykkzUGZ3DvOpy/c7eA87u/Wqxi hGABiye2v/dx8mIxfWteNW2RoVKx4zz4JArr4BOeDRLeFMdPi7cadVLLAdBwVcF0q/2k CulQ==
X-Received: by 10.141.28.6 with SMTP id f6mr21052055qhe.97.1429575551406; Mon, 20 Apr 2015 17:19:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.1.3] (209-6-114-252.c3-0.arl-ubr1.sbo-arl.ma.cable.rcn.com. [209.6.114.252]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id g80sm198533qkh.18.2015.04.20.17.19.09 (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Mon, 20 Apr 2015 17:19:10 -0700 (PDT)
From: Kathleen Moriarty <kathleen.moriarty.ietf@gmail.com>
X-Google-Original-From: Kathleen Moriarty <Kathleen.Moriarty.ietf@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0)
X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (11D257)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.GSO.1.10.1504201834250.22210@multics.mit.edu>
Date: Mon, 20 Apr 2015 20:19:10 -0400
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <541B61E0-AC84-42B3-8F81-97D0D132FB91@gmail.com>
References: <20150418215222.7ABFD180206@rfc-editor.org> <4268E41F-712E-425D-B514-C0023D311462@gmail.com> <tsl7ft7zx9f.fsf@mit.edu> <20150419230843.GP13041@localhost> <tsly4lmyl7i.fsf@mit.edu> <20150420155313.GQ13041@localhost> <tsl8udmyd02.fsf@mit.edu> <alpine.GSO.1.10.1504201834250.22210@multics.mit.edu>
To: Benjamin Kaduk <kaduk@MIT.EDU>
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/kitten/ki0zm1A0Pc_WhoNTJL3q9KDxNDk>
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Mon, 20 Apr 2015 17:55:22 -0700
Cc: "kitten@ietf.org" <kitten@ietf.org>, RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org>, Sam Hartman <hartmans-ietf@MIT.EDU>, "leifj@sunet.se" <leifj@sunet.se>
Subject: Re: [kitten] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC6680 (4337)
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: Tue, 21 Apr 2015 00:19:14 -0000

As Sam said, we can put a note in it and can edit the text of the proposed errata.  Tell us what this changes are and either Stephen or I will update and mark the errata.

Thanks,
Kathleen 

Sent from my iPhone

> On Apr 20, 2015, at 7:36 PM, Benjamin Kaduk <kaduk@MIT.EDU> wrote:
> 
> On Mon, 20 Apr 2015, Sam Hartman wrote:
> 
>>>>>>> "Nico" == Nico Williams <nico@cryptonector.com> writes:
>> 
>>    Nico> On Mon, Apr 20, 2015 at 09:37:37AM -0400, Sam Hartman wrote:
>>>> Well, I agree that we did think that things might block.
>> 
>>>> I am less clear that we thought about anything specific that
>>>> wouldn't block, and I'm concerned introducing this text implies
>>>> there are things that don't block.
>> 
>>    Nico> I always thought that attributes listed in GSS_Inquire_name()
>>    Nico> wouldn't block: because they are would be "raw" things in
>>    Nico> Kerberos authorization-data or similar.
>> 
>> I agree that we should write applications assuming they will be fast.
>> That's very different from non-blocking for reasons including the ones I
>> already explained: network swap, demand paging over the net, database
>> lookups for things like nss etc that you'd expect to be fast but
>> sometimes aren't.
> 
> I do not disagree.
> 
> I used the term "block" in the erratum submission because that is the
> terminology used in RFC 2743, and the erratum should be consistent with
> the current base spec.
> 
>> Basically, I don't think the IETF is in a position to say something is
>> non-blocking because there are many reasonable implementations where
>> that's simply impossible to implement.
>> We can talk about whether an application should be prepared for an API
>> to take a while.
> 
> That's probably a better set of language to use, yes.  We should keep it
> in mind when we pick up a 6680bis or 2743bis.
> 
> -Ben