Re: [SECMECH] Framework Bindings Vs. Mechanism Bridges

Jari Arkko <jari.arkko@piuha.net> Thu, 25 August 2005 13:53 UTC

Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1E8IB3-00087s-97; Thu, 25 Aug 2005 09:53:57 -0400
Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1E8IB1-00087k-Rf for secmech@megatron.ietf.org; Thu, 25 Aug 2005 09:53:55 -0400
Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id JAA18358 for <secmech@ietf.org>; Thu, 25 Aug 2005 09:53:54 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from p130.piuha.net ([193.234.218.130]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1E8IBZ-0003vk-3S for secmech@ietf.org; Thu, 25 Aug 2005 09:54:29 -0400
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (p130.piuha.net [193.234.218.130]) by p130.piuha.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9879189852; Thu, 25 Aug 2005 16:53:46 +0300 (EEST)
Message-ID: <430DCD75.5040601@piuha.net>
Date: Thu, 25 Aug 2005 16:53:57 +0300
From: Jari Arkko <jari.arkko@piuha.net>
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0 (X11/20041206)
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Shumon Huque <shuque@isc.upenn.edu>
Subject: Re: [SECMECH] Framework Bindings Vs. Mechanism Bridges
References: <5057734.1124708889160.JavaMail.servlet@kundenserver> <20050822114112.GA343@isc.upenn.edu>
In-Reply-To: <20050822114112.GA343@isc.upenn.edu>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: 7655788c23eb79e336f5f8ba8bce7906
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: secmech@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: secmech@lists.ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Security mechanisms BOF <secmech.lists.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/secmech>, <mailto:secmech-request@lists.ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/secmech>
List-Post: <mailto:secmech@lists.ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:secmech-request@lists.ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/secmech>, <mailto:secmech-request@lists.ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: secmech-bounces@lists.ietf.org
Errors-To: secmech-bounces@lists.ietf.org

Shumon Huque wrote:

>On Mon, Aug 22, 2005 at 01:08:09PM +0200, t.otto@sharevolution.de wrote:
>  
>
>>There already exists a Kerberos extension to TLS, RFC 2712 (Oct.99),
>>which can be run in EAP-TLS, so the question is: 
>>
>>* Is there need for EAP-Kerberos at all? * 
>>    
>>
>
>RFC 2712 doesn't provide for initial and service ticket 
>acquisition. So, at the very least an EAP method that
>allows you to do that needs to be developed.
>  
>
Do you need a fix to EAP, or do you a fix to kerberos-in-TLS?
The latter might be applicable in a number of other scenarios,
too...

--Jari


_______________________________________________
SECMECH mailing list
SECMECH@lists.ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/secmech