IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Ietf-krb-wg] Review of draft-sorce-krbwg-general-pac-02

Josh Howlett <Josh.Howlett@ja.net> Tue, 21 June 2011 13:24 UTC

Return-Path: <ietf-krb-wg-bounces@lists.anl.gov>
X-Original-To: ietfarch-krb-wg-archive@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietfarch-krb-wg-archive@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9D82911E80C1 for <ietfarch-krb-wg-archive@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 21 Jun 2011 06:24:59 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -105.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-105.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=1.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
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 trYL2dp1bDeL for <ietfarch-krb-wg-archive@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 21 Jun 2011 06:24:58 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mailhost.anl.gov (mailhost.anl.gov [130.202.113.50]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CA55011E8083 for <krb-wg-archive@lists.ietf.org>; Tue, 21 Jun 2011 06:24:58 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mailhost.anl.gov (mailhost.anl.gov [130.202.113.50]) by localhost.anl.gov (Postfix) with ESMTP id 054881A; Tue, 21 Jun 2011 08:24:57 -0500 (CDT)
Received: from lists.anl.gov (katydid.it.anl.gov [146.137.96.32]) by mailhost.anl.gov (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1432048; Tue, 21 Jun 2011 08:24:56 -0500 (CDT)
Received: from katydid.it.anl.gov (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by lists.anl.gov (Postfix) with ESMTP id EA45180E9A; Tue, 21 Jun 2011 08:24:55 -0500 (CDT)
X-Original-To: ietf-krb-wg@lists.anl.gov
Delivered-To: ietf-krb-wg@lists.anl.gov
Received: from mailrelay.anl.gov (mailrelay.anl.gov [130.202.101.22]) by lists.anl.gov (Postfix) with ESMTP id 778AB80E88 for <ietf-krb-wg@lists.anl.gov>; Tue, 21 Jun 2011 08:24:54 -0500 (CDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost.it.anl.gov (Postfix) with ESMTP id 58F087CC05E; Tue, 21 Jun 2011 08:24:54 -0500 (CDT)
Received: from mailrelay.anl.gov ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mailrelay.anl.gov [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 23516-01; Tue, 21 Jun 2011 08:24:54 -0500 (CDT)
Received: from mailgateway.anl.gov (mailgateway.anl.gov [130.202.101.28]) by mailrelay.anl.gov (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3D2F97CC056 for <ietf-krb-wg@lists.anl.gov>; Tue, 21 Jun 2011 08:24:54 -0500 (CDT)
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AlIEAJiaAE7CUoxKgWdsb2JhbABUpm8UAQEWJiWIcwK/fIYqBKFs
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.65,401,1304312400"; d="scan'208";a="62217139"
Received: from egw001.ukerna.ac.uk ([194.82.140.74]) by mailgateway.anl.gov with ESMTP; 21 Jun 2011 08:24:53 -0500
Received: from egw001.ukerna.ac.uk (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by localhost (Email Security Appliance) with SMTP id BD7CD1A9AD41_E009BA4B; Tue, 21 Jun 2011 13:24:52 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from EXC001.atlas.ukerna.ac.uk (exc001.atlas.ukerna.ac.uk [193.62.83.37]) by egw001.ukerna.ac.uk (Sophos Email Appliance) with ESMTP id AF2951A9AD3E_E009BA4F; Tue, 21 Jun 2011 13:24:52 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from EXC001.atlas.ukerna.ac.uk ([193.62.83.37]) by EXC001 ([193.62.83.37]) with mapi id 14.01.0289.001; Tue, 21 Jun 2011 14:24:21 +0100
From: Josh Howlett <Josh.Howlett@ja.net>
To: Simo Sorce <simo@redhat.com>
Thread-Topic: [Ietf-krb-wg] Review of draft-sorce-krbwg-general-pac-02
Thread-Index: AQHMMAyG4NotbIg08EaueELzIpiRbpTHsRGAgAAsywA=
Date: Tue, 21 Jun 2011 13:24:20 +0000
Message-ID: <CA2664BE.21028%josh.howlett@ja.net>
In-Reply-To: <1308660271.25324.20.camel@willson.li.ssimo.org>
Accept-Language: en-GB, en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/14.10.0.110310
x-originating-ip: [194.82.140.76]
Content-ID: <ACC4B0BA95E31F46BAC8C6DC4826588B@ukerna.ac.uk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at frigga.it.anl.gov
Cc: "ietf-krb-wg@lists.anl.gov" <ietf-krb-wg@lists.anl.gov>
Subject: Re: [Ietf-krb-wg] Review of draft-sorce-krbwg-general-pac-02
X-BeenThere: ietf-krb-wg@lists.anl.gov
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14
Precedence: list
List-Id: "This is a list for the IETF Kerberos Working Group. {WORLDPUB, EXTERNAL}" <ietf-krb-wg.lists.anl.gov>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.anl.gov/mailman/options/ietf-krb-wg>, <mailto:ietf-krb-wg-request@lists.anl.gov?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://lists.anl.gov/pipermail/ietf-krb-wg>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf-krb-wg@lists.anl.gov>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-krb-wg-request@lists.anl.gov?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.anl.gov/mailman/listinfo/ietf-krb-wg>, <mailto:ietf-krb-wg-request@lists.anl.gov?subject=subscribe>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Errors-To: ietf-krb-wg-bounces@lists.anl.gov
Sender: ietf-krb-wg-bounces@lists.anl.gov

>
>> GSS naming extensions is encoding agnostic and so GSS implementations
>> could in principle be extended to support the proposed PAD format, but
>>in
>> practice it may be more efficient to re-use encodings that GSS acceptor
>> implementations already (or are likely to) support, such as SAML, rather
>> than invent a new one.
>
>While GSS may find SAML slightly easier, we have to consider also the
>KDC implementations. And space constraints. In the KDC SAML parsers are
>not available, plus SAML tends to be quite more verbose and eat more
>space (the PAD is attached to the ticket and we do not want overly large
>tickets if possible). Plus there is the signatures part, which requires
>us to treat the PAD as a buffer.

...

>It could, but I didn't want to add SAML as a dependency for a KDC. ASN.1
>while not fancy is available already in both the KDC and the Kerberos
>client libraries, so it seems a more common denominator.

I'm certainly sympathetic to those arguments, but would be interested to
hear the opinions of implementors. I think Luke has already implemented
something for MIT...?

Another consumer that I forgot to mention is the n-tier, but I don't think
that's different in this context from the first GSS acceptor.


(On entitlements)
>I didn't want to go beyond that in this first standard because it would
>require much more work to reach consensus.

Sounds reasonable to me.

Josh.



JANET(UK) is a trading name of The JNT Association, a company limited
by guarantee which is registered in England under No. 2881024 
and whose Registered Office is at Lumen House, Library Avenue,
Harwell Oxford, Didcot, Oxfordshire. OX11 0SG

_______________________________________________
ietf-krb-wg mailing list
ietf-krb-wg@lists.anl.gov
https://lists.anl.gov/mailman/listinfo/ietf-krb-wg

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email