Re: [sasl] MOGGIES Proposed Charter

Jeffrey Hutzelman <jhutz@cmu.edu> Tue, 18 May 2010 22:36 UTC

Return-Path: <jhutz@cmu.edu>
X-Original-To: kitten@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: kitten@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9B58D3A6877; Tue, 18 May 2010 15:36:54 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.112
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.112 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.487, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ZVFvkYetTtEm; Tue, 18 May 2010 15:36:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtp01.srv.cs.cmu.edu (SMTP01.SRV.CS.CMU.EDU [128.2.217.196]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id ADD6C3A685F; Tue, 18 May 2010 15:36:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.1.109] (SIRIUS.FAC.CS.CMU.EDU [128.2.216.216]) (authenticated bits=0) by smtp01.srv.cs.cmu.edu (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id o4IMag5p011570 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Tue, 18 May 2010 18:36:44 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Tue, 18 May 2010 18:36:42 -0400
From: Jeffrey Hutzelman <jhutz@cmu.edu>
To: Nicolas Williams <Nicolas.Williams@oracle.com>
Subject: Re: [sasl] MOGGIES Proposed Charter
Message-ID: <184AE5042EA2EBECF7E0D5EE@atlantis.pc.cs.cmu.edu>
In-Reply-To: <20100518213840.GO9429@oracle.com>
References: <4BF221C1.2090005@oracle.com> <22122_1274210205_o4IJGi7g000698_20100518191521.GL9429@oracle.com> <0653C22222CBEBDD0AD1CCFA@minbar.fac.cs.cmu.edu> <20100518213840.GO9429@oracle.com>
X-Mailer: Mulberry/4.0.8 (Linux/x86)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
X-Scanned-By: mimedefang-cmuscs on 128.2.217.196
Cc: kitten@ietf.org, jhutz@cmu.edu, sasl@ietf.org, Tim Polk <tim.polk@nist.gov>
X-BeenThere: kitten@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Common Authentication Technologies - Next Generation <kitten.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/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, 18 May 2010 22:36:54 -0000

--On Tuesday, May 18, 2010 04:38:40 PM -0500 Nicolas Williams 
<Nicolas.Williams@oracle.com> wrote:

> On Tue, May 18, 2010 at 05:09:17PM -0400, Jeffrey Hutzelman wrote:
>> > New SASL mechanisms?  Why not new GSS-API mechanisms?  Why not close
>> > the WG (and even SASL) to new non-GS2 mechanisms?  Might there be
>> > conflicts with EMU?
>>
>> This WG should review proposals for new SASL and GSS-API mechanisms,
>> and such work should be considered to fall within its general scope,
>> but it should be constrained to actually work only on mechanisms
>> specifically listed in the charter.  If we want to work on a new
>> mechanism, we can amend the charter.
>
> OK, which mechanisms, if any should the WG work on?

The ones already in the proposed charter.