[Ietf-krb-wg] RFC-Editor Note for draft-ietf-krb-wg-naming-07

[Jeffrey Hutzelman <[e-mail]>]

In order to address issues raised during IETF Last Call and/or IESG review, 
we're attaching the following Notes to the RFC Editor to naming.  Modulo 
these changes, this document has been approved and should enter the RFC 
Editor's queue shortly.

-- Jeff

  Please make the following changes prior to publication:

  In Section 1:
  OLD:
     This document is to remedy these issues by defining well-known
     Kerberos names and the protocol behavior when a well-known name is
     used but not supported.
  NEW:
     This document remedies these issues by defining well-known
     Kerberos names and the protocol behavior when a well-known name is
     used but not supported.

  OLD:
     In the case of the anonymity support, it is critical that
     deployed Kerberos implementations that do not support anonymity MUST
     fail the authentication if the anonymity name pair is used, therefore
     no access is granted accidentally to a principal who's name happens
     to match with that of the anonymous identity.
  NEW:
     In the case of the anonymity support, it is critical that
     deployed Kerberos implementations that do not support anonymity
     fail the authentication if the anonymity name pair is used, therefore
     no access is granted accidentally to a principal who's name happens
     to match with that of the anonymous identity.
  (deleting the word "MUST")


  In Section 3.1 (case change):
  OLD:
     A well-known principal name MUST have at least two or more
     KerberosString components, and the first component must be the string
     literal "WELLKNOWN".
  NEW:
     A well-known principal name MUST have at least two or more
     KerberosString components, and the first component MUST be the string
     literal "WELLKNOWN".

  Also in Section 3.1, replace "KDC" by "Key Distribution Center (KDC)".

  In Section 4:
  OLD:
     It is possible to have name collision with well-known names because
     Kerberos as defined in [RFC4120] does not reserve names that have
     special meanings, consequently care MUST be taken to avoid accidental
     reuse of names.

  NEW:
     It is possible to have name collision with well-known names because
     Kerberos as defined in [RFC4120] does not reserve names that have
     special meanings, accidental reuse of names MUST be avoided.

  In Section 6:
  OLD:
     "Specification Required".
  NEW:
     "Specification Required", as specified in [RFC5226]

  In Section 7.1, add the following normative reference:

     [RFC5226]  Narten, T. and H. Alvestrand, "Guidelines for Writing an
                IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", BCP 26, RFC 5226,
                May 2008.



_______________________________________________
ietf-krb-wg mailing list
[e-mail]
https://lists.anl.gov/mailman/listinfo/ietf-krb-wg