Subject: Summary of IETF63 Kitten meeting

From: Jeffrey Altman <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 03 Aug 2005 19:02:46 +0200

The Kitten working group met at IETF63 in one of the new style rooms.
We really lucked out because the room contained at least three mobile
microphones that were handed out to the audience.  It enabled
realtime discussions in a much more flexible format.  We would like
to see more of this at future IETF meetings.  More mobile mics the
better.

Summarized document status:

* PRF API extension for GSS draft -05 submitted
  Addresses issues raised during the most recent WGLC.
  Will be submitted for a short WGLC next week

* PRF API for Kerberos 5 GSS draft -04 passed WGLC
  Being held until the generic PRF extension document
  passes WGLC

* Corrections and Updates of GSS-API Java Bindings
  The existing draft contains a list of changes from RFC 2853.
  These changes were the result of the Java Community Process
  making changes after the RFC was finished.  The JCP is what
  was implemented.   The IETF is effectively rubber stamping
  these changes as no one implements the RFC.

  It has been made clear to Sun that for current work the JCP
  cannot make changes after the documents pass last call.  A
  new draft will be submitted shortly that is 2853 with all of
  the changes applied.

* C# Bindings
  Since IETF62 consensus was reached to split the C# and Java
  Bindings into separate documents.
  A new draft providing a full C# binding based upon
  RFC 2853 will be published next week.

* Desired Enhancements to GSS Naming
  An informational draft providing scope for the naming problems
  the working group will solve.   All sections but number 7
  appear to be ready for WGLC.  The chair wishes to expand the
  description of the credential selection problem described by
  section 7 before it moves forward.

* GSS-API Naming Extensions
  Draft -00 submitted in May but has not received discussion
  on the mailing list.

* Clarifications to GSSAPI v2 Update 1
  No draft yet published and the milestone has been missed
  Previous volunteers to work on this draft have withdrawn.

Technical Discussions: GSS-API Naming Extensions
draft-ietf-kitten-gssapi-naming-exts-00.txt

The working group reviewed the contents of the draft for the
purpose of boot strapping discussion as no one had read it
before the meeting.

The draft has a summary of the problems caused by the limited
naming capabilities of GSS import and export name when attempting
to use the authenticated name for the purpose of constructing ACLs.

This is followed by five sections describing how to extend GSS names
with name attributes including sections on how to use pkix attributes
and kerberos authorization data.   The details are very incomplete
and need significant review.  We especially need volunteers from
the pkix community to assist in this effort.

The document describes a proposed abstract api plus C and java
language bindings.  There is also an IANA considerations.

* use of names on ACLs

* the need for including critical bit on attributes.  This is expected
  to be easy for PKIX but it is not authenticated.

* corrections to the use of kerberos cross realm transit paths.
  cross realm transit path lists are not ordered.  they only provide
  a list of the realms that were crossed.

* the current draft's description of how to reference x.509 trust paths
  is very incomplete.  The full path from the trust anchor must be
   specified.

* Inclusion of PKIX proxy certificates must be specified

* Must ensure that the EKU OID is used as part of PKIX names

* There is concern that naming is an extremely broad and highly complex
  problem.  Can it be done in a simple generic manner?

* The inquire function scares many people.

* name attributes are being treated as tagged blobs.  This results in
  problems both with how to represent dependencies between blobs and
  how to handle in a generic manner how to extract sub-parts of a blob.

* there is a concern with how we can successfully compare names when
  there are arbitrary sets of name attributes.   What is the canonical
  name?   Part of the justification for this work is because there is
  not always a canonical name that is static for all time.

* there needs to be a means of limiting the credentials provided to
  an application based upon the needs of the application and the
  qualities the credentials support.

* Denis Pikas wrote for CAT a draft to describe how to represent
  group membership.  It can be found via google.  The wg should
  review:
	draft-ietf-cat-xgssapi-acc-cntrl-03.txt

* Review closely the saml attribute work

* There is a desire to support negative attributes.   In order to
  do so there must be some means of indicating that for a given set
  of positive and negative ACLs that all of the negative ACLs have
  been included and none have been removed.

The wg ran out of time.  Clearly more discussion is required on the
list.  Please read the draft.

Technical Discussion:  Moving RFC2743 and RFC2744 to Draft

Our AD, Sam Hartman, requested that the WG consider the steps necessary
to move RFCs 2743 and 2744 from Proposed to Draft.

The wg discussed the scope of interoperability testing at both the
wire and language layers.  The wg intends to design a test matrix that
is rough grained across implementation of features.   Nico Williams
will ask for assistance within Sun Microsystems for assistance to the
chair in putting together the test matrix.  The WG will look at
gssmonger as a source of tests.

Technical Discussion:  Review ML archives to find content for
'Clarifications to GSSAPIv2'

The wg ran out of time to discuss this topic.   The chair is going
to ask specific people for assistance with this task.  If this milestone
is not being bet the wg will have to stop working on other efforts
people care a great deal about.

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