IETF Logo Mail Archive

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

Thomas Maslen <Thomas.Maslen@quest.com> Wed, 08 June 2011 17:38 UTC

Return-Path: <Thomas.Maslen@quest.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 0B06A11E8174 for <kitten@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 8 Jun 2011 10:38:39 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
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 3UTn3G1eoh8x for <kitten@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 8 Jun 2011 10:38:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from alvetxw01.quest.com (alvetxw01.quest.com [12.106.87.93]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 66CF811E8076 for <kitten@ietf.org>; Wed, 8 Jun 2011 10:38:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ALVHTXW10.prod.quest.corp (10.1.135.22) by alvetxw01.quest.com (10.1.100.93) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.255.0; Wed, 8 Jun 2011 10:35:18 -0700
Received: from ALVMBXW01.prod.quest.corp ([fe80::48dd:e065:86b3:9cee]) by ALVHTXW10.prod.quest.corp ([::1]) with mapi id 14.01.0218.012; Wed, 8 Jun 2011 10:38:37 -0700
From: Thomas Maslen <Thomas.Maslen@quest.com>
To: Nico Williams <nico@cryptonector.com>, Sam Hartman <hartmans-ietf@mit.edu>
Thread-Topic: [Ietf-krb-wg] Channel bindings -- interop issue with GSS_C_AF_*
Thread-Index: AQHMJf0Zgp1L8fcswUq0Wg4hAhbIRpS0KPsA//+NS7E=
Date: Wed, 08 Jun 2011 17:38:36 +0000
Message-ID: <D5847DD823005F4E9DB94FE77DCEDF680FEE7953@ALVMBXW01.prod.quest.corp>
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>, <BANLkTimy2ZQCHc6JUK4GaaxJj8BSHfJymA@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTimy2ZQCHc6JUK4GaaxJj8BSHfJymA@mail.gmail.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.1.104.156]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Cc: "kitten@ietf.org" <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 17:38:39 -0000

Nico Williams wrote:
>
> [...] We then need only determine which one Windows is using now.

My understanding -- based both on some Microsoft documentation and on
tweaking our implementation to validate a CB hash generated by a Windows
HTTPS-SPNEGO client -- is that Microsoft does exactly the same thing that
you specified in RFC5801:  set the address-type to zero (and of course the
address-length is also zero).


And I agree with Sam + you:  we shouldn't break Microsoft's implementation,
nor should we break RFC5801.  Instead we should update RFC2744 /
RFC5554 / whatever to use 0, not 255, as the address-type for omitted addresses.

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