Re: [Ietf-krb-wg] AD review of draft-ietf-krb-wg-gss-cb-hash-agility

[Shawn Emery <[e-mail]>]

On 08/12/11 09:59 AM, Sam Hartman wrote:
> I'd appreciate responses to the rest of the AD comments. Here are
> responses I can make.
>
>
>>>>>> "Stephen" == Stephen Farrell<[e-mail]>  writes:
>      Stephen>  1) the write-up says that the WG need to figure out where
>      Stephen>  to put the new IANA registry for extension types, have you
>      Stephen>  figured that out yet? (The write-up also asks for IETF LC
>      Stephen>  to not start until that's sorted out.)
>
> No one objected to my proposed text.
> Authors, can you incorporate  my proposed text creating the registry
> into the next version?

It's been updated in my copy.

>      Stephen>  2) Where's the key usage number 43 come from? (I do see
>      Stephen>  7.5.1 from rfc 4120) Is there an IANA registry for these?
>      Stephen>  (I didn't see it.) If not, should there be? If so, should
>      Stephen>  this document just create that too? (And what's the update
>      Stephen>  rule - FCFS?) If this is better not done as an IANA
>      Stephen>  registry (or not now) then I'd appreciate the explanation
>      Stephen>  in any case, even if that's not added to the document.
>      Stephen>  (But why not add it?)
>
> This is not yet managed by IANA; draft-lha-krb-wg-some-numbers-to-iana
> creates the registry.  Tom Yu is keeping track meanwhile. We discussed
> the big outstanding issue with Love's draft at IETF 80; we expect to be
> making progress shortly.
>
>      Stephen>  3) A test vector for one popular variation of get_mic would
>      Stephen>  be very good to add - with all the endian stuff I could see
>      Stephen>  this being done wrong quite easily but in a way that a
>      Stephen>  single implementation would not show up.
>
> Can someone volunteer to include this?
> I agree that this would be really helpful.

I will look into this...

>      Stephen>  3) id-nits has a couple of warnings - can you check if
>      Stephen>  those are ok and fix if not?
>
> I did check as part of doing the writeup.

Per subsequent e-mails, these have been determined to be false-positives.

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