Re: [kitten] TLS export for channel binding

[Robbie Harwood <[e-mail]>]

"Sam Whited" <[e-mail]> writes:

> On Thu, May 7, 2020, at 12:04, Robbie Harwood wrote:
>
>> (Chair/obnoxious process hat on) I think it would be best to have a
>> formalized call for adoption in kitten - that's a separate email with
>> "call for adoption" and the thing to adopt in the subject.  What I've
>> observed so far is interest in the document existing (and willingness
>> to work on it), but not specifically in kitten.  We'll let that
>> simmer about a week, and then if there's consensus, we can adopt.
>
> Thanks for your help. Is that an email I should send when I figure out
> whether this belongs in TLS or KITTEN, or should I ask someone else to
> issue the call, perhaps the chair?
>
> Today I've been thinking that this really depends on whether the draft
> is SCRAM specific or not. If it is, this might be a better place to
> take on the work, if not, the TLS WG might be better. Although if it's
> not SCRAM specific it probably doesn't matter where it lives because
> the I-D becomes almost trivial, it's just instructions for IANA to
> register two labels in a registry so that the existing TLS channel
> binding mechanism can be used from SASL.

To provide an update here: conversation with TLS is ongoing and we are
waiting to hear back at this time.

Thanks,
--Robbie