Re: [kitten] advancing some documents to the IESG

[Stephen Farrell <[e-mail]>]

Thanks Ben! I look forward to us doing this queue-clearing and
hope the WG find the workflow better.

S.

On 31/08/16 02:51, Benjamin Kaduk wrote:
> (was Re: [kitten] I-D Action: draft-ietf-kitten-krb-auth-indicator-02.txt)
> 
> Looping back to this thread, now that we have the extra reviews from
> Richard and Gerard, the chairs are comfortable advancing it to the IESG; I
> will shepherd.  In accordance with our new workflow, there will not be an
> additional WGLC, but feel free to comment (or object) at any time.
> 
> We also have draft-ietf-kitten-rfc6112bis active, for which Shawn has
> published an updated version (with help from the secretariat).  It needs a
> few more tweaks to the wording and attack description, but the core
> protocol portions look good, so once the revisions are in place, that can
> also move forward to the IESG.  As always, comments are always welcome.
> 
> draft-ietf-kitten-rfc5653bis went through WGLC at the same time as
> rfc6112bis, and also has an updated version as a result of the comments
> from WGLC.  (As a reminder: the main goal is to allow GSSAPI error tokens
> to be generated along with the GSSException that indicates the failure,
> but the review also indicated issues with the stream-based GSSContext
> methods, leading to their removal from the current draft.)  Richard,
> Gerard, and everyone else are encouraged to review that document.
> 
> draft-ietf-kitten-pkinit-freshness is waiting for a shepherd writeup and
> then is expected to advance to the IESG.
> 
> In other PKINIT-related work, the most recent threads the chairs have
> about draft-ietf-kitten-pkinit-alg-agility indicate that it should also be
> ready to advance, but given how long ago they were, some additional
> research is in order to verify that.  More (re-)reviews wouldn't hurt,
> either!
> 
> Please feel free to contact the chairs (or the list) with any questions,
> concerns, or most especially document reviews.
> 
> -Ben
> for the kitten chairs
> 
> 
> 
> On Mon, 27 Jun 2016, Nathaniel McCallum wrote:
> 
>> I'm happy to do so. But, AFAIK, the only review thus far has been
>> yours. There were several other +1's to WG adoption, but no other
>> reviews.
>>
>> On Sat, 2016-06-25 at 23:46 -0400, Benjamin Kaduk wrote:
>>> Yes, it would be good to move this document forward, especially since
>>> it
>>> already has implementation experience.  Would you be interested in
>>> trying
>>> out the proposal to manually track reviews and (mostly) skip WGLC for
>>> this
>>> document?  That thread has not gotten many responses yet...
>>>
>>> -Ben
>>>
>>> On Thu, 23 Jun 2016, Nathaniel McCallum wrote:
>>>
>>>> I propsed this and hear no response. Can we move this draft
>>> forward?
>>>>
>>>> On Mon, 2016-05-16 at 12:41 -0400, Nathaniel McCallum wrote:
>>>>> With this revision, I believe that we are in the home stretch on
>>> this
>>>>> draft. Unless anyone has any objections, I'd like to request that
>>> the
>>>>> chairs begin WGLC.
>>>>>
>>>>> On Mon, 2016-05-16 at 09:17 -0700, [e-mail] wrote
>>> :
>>>>>> A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-
>>> Drafts
>>>>>> directories.
>>>>>> This draft is a work item of the Common Authentication
>>> Technology
>>>>>> Next Generation of the IETF.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>         Title           : Authentication Indicator in Kerberos
>>>>>> Tickets
>>>>>>         Authors         : Anupam Jain
>>>>>>                           Nathan Kinder
>>>>>>                           Nathaniel McCallum
>>>>>>    Filename        : draft-ietf-kitten-krb-auth-indicator-02.txt
>>>>>>    Pages           : 5
>>>>>>    Date            : 2016-05-16
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Abstract:
>>>>>>    This document specifies an extension in the Kerberos
>>> protocol
>>>>>>    [RFC4120].  It defines a new authorization data type AD-
>>>>>>    AUTHENTICATION-INDICATOR.  The purpose of introducing this
>>> data
>>>>>> type
>>>>>>    is to include an indicator of the strength of a client's
>>>>>>    authentication in the service tickets so that application
>>>>>> services
>>>>>>    can use it as an input into policy decisions.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is:
>>>>>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-kitten-krb-auth-ind
>>> icat
>>>>>> or
>>>>>> /
>>>>>>
>>>>>> There's also a htmlized version available at:
>>>>>> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-kitten-krb-auth-indicato
>>> r-02
>>>>>>
>>>>>> A diff from the previous version is available at:
>>>>>> https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-kitten-krb-auth-in
>>> dica
>>>>>> to
>>>>>> r-02
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time
>>> of
>>>>>> submission
>>>>>> until the htmlized version and diff are available at
>>>>>> tools.ietf.org.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at:
>>>>>> ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/
>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> Kitten mailing list
>>>>>> [e-mail]
>>>>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/kitten
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Kitten mailing list
>>>>> [e-mail]
>>>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/kitten
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Kitten mailing list
>>>> [e-mail]
>>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/kitten
>>>>
>>
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Kitten mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/kitten
>