Subject: Proposed Agenda for IETF 61 (Draft 1)

From: Jeffrey Altman <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2004 02:32:38 -0400

Charter Review  (20 minutes)

New Drafts:

  - Guide to the GSS-APIv3
    (draft-williams-gssapi-v3-guide-to-00.txt)

  - Namespace Considerations and Registries for GSS-API Extensions
    (draft-williams-gssapi-extensions-iana-00.txt)

  - GSS-API Domain-Based Service Names and Name Type
    (draft-williams-gssapi-domain-based-names-00.txt)

  - GSS-API Domain-Based Service Names Mapping for the Kerberos V GSS
    Mechanism
    (draft-williams-krb5-gssapi-domain-based-names-00.txt)

  - A PRF API extension for the GSS-API
    (draft-williams-gssapi-prf-00.txt)

  - A PRF for the Kerberos V GSS-API Mechanism
    (draft-williams-krb5-gssapi-prf-00.txt)

  - Generic Security Service API Version 2 : Java & C# Bindings
    (draft-morris-java-gssapi-update-for-csharp-00.txt)

  - The Simple and Protected GSS-API Negotiation Mechanism
    (draft-zhu-spnego-2478bis-00.txt)

Are there any additional topics folks would like to discuss?

I think we are currently looking at a 90 minute time slot

_______________________________________________
Kitten mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/kitten

---

From: Sam Hartman <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 23 Oct 2004 18:50:12 -0400

>>>>> "Jeffrey" == Jeffrey Altman <[email-masked]> writes:

    Jeffrey>   - GSS-API Domain-Based Service Names Mapping for the
    Jeffrey> Kerberos V GSS Mechanism
    Jeffrey> (draft-williams-krb5-gssapi-domain-based-names-00.txt)

Why is this our draft not krb-wg's?

    Jeffrey>   - A PRF for the Kerberos V GSS-API Mechanism
    Jeffrey> (draft-williams-krb5-gssapi-prf-00.txt)
Same here.

---

From: Jeffrey Altman <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 27 Oct 2004 09:20:18 -0400

>     Jeffrey> (draft-williams-krb5-gssapi-prf-00.txt)

I believe the question which these documents raise is to what extent
do we want discussions of new GSS-API features to be taking place in
two working groups.  If we are defining PRF for GSS then we are going
to require a PRF for the mechs as well.  Do we really want to be holding
discussions PRF for GSS in both Kitten and Kerberos?

I believe it is acceptable at IETF 61 for Nico to present these 
documents at Kitten as they are not at this point working group 
documents.  I would like to discuss where these documents belong at
the Kitten meeting.

Jeffrey Altman

---

From: Nicolas Williams <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 27 Oct 2004 13:57:50 -0500

> documents.  I would like to discuss where these documents belong at

I also see no problem with presenting these I-Ds at KITTEN; if nothing
else doing so would show that we are doing the mechanism-specific work
needed to instantiate these extensions, that we are making progress on
our charter.

That said, as long as the KRB WG is open for business then these two
I-Ds can be reviewed and last called there.

Nico
--

---

From: Jeffrey Hutzelman <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2004 18:05:14 -0400

On Wednesday, October 27, 2004 09:20:18 -0400 Jeffrey Altman 
<[email-masked]> wrote:

> I believe it is acceptable at IETF 61 for Nico to present these documents
> at Kitten as they are not at this point working group documents.  I would
> like to discuss where these documents belong at the Kitten meeting.

Yes, that sounds like a good idea.
You should make sure to mention this over on krb-wg, so people there who 
don't also read here will know the discussion is happening.

-- Jeff