Re: [kitten] Adoption ofdraft-mccallum-kitten-krb-service-discovery?

Nathaniel McCallum <npmccallum@redhat.com> Wed, 18 May 2016 17:02 UTC

Return-Path: <npmccallum@redhat.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 A9AF012D5A8 for <kitten@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 18 May 2016 10:02:30 -0700 (PDT)
X-Quarantine-ID: <sQksr1URLiWm>
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Amavis-Alert: BAD HEADER SECTION, Improper folded header field made up entirely of whitespace (char 09 hex): References: ...2432.9.camel@redhat.com>\n\t\n <alpine.GSO.1[...]
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -8.326
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.326 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HK_RANDOM_ENVFROM=0.001, HK_RANDOM_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-1.426, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 sQksr1URLiWm for <kitten@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 18 May 2016 10:02:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx1.redhat.com (mx1.redhat.com [209.132.183.28]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 11A9E12D567 for <kitten@ietf.org>; Wed, 18 May 2016 10:02:26 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.23]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A79E56540F; Wed, 18 May 2016 17:02:25 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from vpn-57-37.rdu2.redhat.com (vpn-57-37.rdu2.redhat.com [10.10.57.37]) by int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id u4IH2LDd019568 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Wed, 18 May 2016 13:02:25 -0400
Message-ID: <1463590940.2481.43.camel@redhat.com>
From: Nathaniel McCallum <npmccallum@redhat.com>
To: "tom p." <daedulus@btconnect.com>, Benjamin Kaduk <kaduk@MIT.EDU>
Date: Wed, 18 May 2016 13:02:20 -0400
In-Reply-To: <016801d1b0ec$f4c0c6e0$4001a8c0@gateway.2wire.net>
References: <1463500163.2432.9.camel@redhat.com> <alpine.GSO.1.10.1605180103430.26829@multics.mit.edu> <016801d1b0ec$f4c0c6e0$4001a8c0@gateway.2wire.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.68 on 10.5.11.23
X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.5.16 (mx1.redhat.com [10.5.110.39]); Wed, 18 May 2016 17:02:25 +0000 (UTC)
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/kitten/zslkUwn_9AZo8Rke83GloV367qQ>
Cc: kitten@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [kitten] Adoption ofdraft-mccallum-kitten-krb-service-discovery?
X-BeenThere: kitten@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
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: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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, 18 May 2016 17:02:31 -0000

On Wed, 2016-05-18 at 09:26 +0100, tom p. wrote:
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Benjamin Kaduk" <kaduk@MIT.EDU>
> To: "Nathaniel McCallum" <npmccallum@redhat.com>
> Cc: <kitten@ietf.org>
> Sent: Wednesday, May 18, 2016 6:10 AM
> > On Tue, 17 May 2016, Nathaniel McCallum wrote:
> > 
> > > 
> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-mccallum-kitten-krb-service-discove
> ry
> > > -02
> > > 
> > > I'd like to propose adoption of this draft:
> > 
> > The chairs are tracking this document and expect it to eventually
> become a
> > working group document.  However, as I implied in our previous
> discussion
> > (off-list), there are a lot of existing WG documents that are not
> moving
> > very fast, and it seems unhealthy to keep a lot of documents around
> > in
> > such a state.  It would be better to finish off (or formally
> > abandon)
> some
> > existing documents before we start trying to take on new work.
> > 
> > I also noted that "adding [Kerberos] bits to the DNS always seems
> harder
> > than one expects", which seems borne out by the discussion
> > triggered
> by
> > your message.
> > 
> > -Ben
> > 
> > P.S. If someone wanted to help clear out the pile of existing WG
> > documents, draft-ietf-kitten-gssapi-extensions-iana,
> > draft-ietf-kitten-rfc5653bis, or draft-ietf-kitten-krb-auth-
> > indicator
> > would be fine places to start.
> 
> P.P.S.
> 
> Perhaps you should operate a one-in one-out policy.  If an author has
> an
> I-D gathering dust in the expired pile, then they should resolve that
> -
> advance it, bin it - before an adoption call is made for another I-D
> by
> them  Authors with a track record of producing RFC might be given a
> bigger pile of tokens for their leaky bucket.

I'm fine with this so long as the author gets to choose the priority.
For instance, I have three drafts. Two of them are small (auth-ind,
service-discovery) and one of them is large (spake-preauth). This order
is also my priority. However, I'd hate to have spake-preauth be pulled
in first and have it block the smaller drafts for years.

Nathaniel