Subject: I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-sasl-4422bis-01.txt

From: [email-masked]
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 2009 13:45:02 -0700 (PDT)

A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts 
directories.
This draft is a work item of the Simple Authentication and Security Layer Working Group of the IETF.

	Title		: Simple Authentication and Security Layer (SASL)
	Author(s)	: A. Melnikov, K. Zeilenga
	Filename	: draft-ietf-sasl-4422bis-01.txt
	Pages		: 32
	Date		: 2009-4-14
	
The Simple Authentication and Security Layer (SASL) is a framework
   for providing authentication and data security services in
   connection-oriented protocols via replaceable mechanisms.  It
   provides a structured interface between protocols and mechanisms.
   The resulting framework allows new protocols to reuse existing
   mechanisms and allows old protocols to make use of new mechanisms.
   The framework also provides a protocol for securing subsequent
   protocol exchanges within a data security layer.

   This document describes how a SASL mechanism is structured, describes
   how protocols include support for SASL, and defines the protocol for
   carrying a data security layer over a connection.  In addition, this
   document defines one SASL mechanism, the EXTERNAL mechanism.

   This document obsoletes RFC 4422 [[when approved]].

A URL for this Internet-Draft is:
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-sasl-4422bis-01.txt

Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at:
ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/

Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader
implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the
Internet-Draft.

---

From: Kurt Zeilenga <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 2009 15:36:13 -0700

This is a simple refresh.

-- Kurt

---

From: Simon Josefsson <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 22 Apr 2009 22:29:25 +0200

I noticed a minor nit in RFC 4422 when writing IANA section for
EXTERNAL-*, namely that in section 7.1.1 I think ' (or prefix for the
family)' is not relevant.  Should it be removed?

/Simon

---

From: Kurt Zeilenga <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 22 Apr 2009 19:45:48 -0700

> family)' is not relevant.  Should it be removed?

Yes.

I also noticed that doesn't say anything about registration of members  
of a family.
To address this, I propose adding the following to the end of 7.1.2.

It is expected that the owner of the family provide appropriate
guidance to IANA regarding registration of family members.  In absence
of any particular guidance, permission of the family owner is required
to register a member of the family.

All IESG-owned families, unless otherwise specified in an IETF
document detailing the family of mechanism, require Expert Review
(as discussed above).

---

From: Simon Josefsson <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 23 Apr 2009 09:55:44 +0200

>> family)' is not relevant.  Should it be removed?

Great.

> document detailing the family of mechanism, require Expert Review

That is useful to add.  The text works for me.

/Simon