[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: WG Last Call: draft-ietf-sasl-gs2-02.txt




Simon Josefsson wrote:

Alexey Melnikov <alexey.melnikov@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
Simon Josefsson wrote:
4.2.  Context Token
[...]
The client calls GSS_Init_sec_context, passing in
input_context_handle of 0 (initially), mech_type of the GSSAPI
mechanism for which this SASL mechanism is registered, the
chan_binding is set to NULL, and targ_name equal to output_name from
GSS_Import_Name called with input_name_type of
GSS_C_NT_HOSTBASED_SERVICE and input_name_string of
The GS1 has the note marker (*) after the "GSS_C_NT_HOSTBASED_SERVICE",
the note reads:

(*) - Clients MAY use name types other than
GSS_C_NT_HOSTBASED_SERVICE to import servers' acceptor names, but
only when they have a priori knowledge that the servers support
alternate name types.  Otherwise clients MUST use
GSS_C_NT_HOSTBASED_SERVICE for importing acceptor names.

This is to address recent Nico's proposal to allow for domain based names.
I've added this.

Is something similar needed for the server side too?
I thinks something like (from GS1) is sufficient:

 (**) - Use of server's principal names having
 GSS_C_NT_HOSTBASED_SERVICE name type and "service@hostname" format,
 where "service" is the service name specified in the protocol's
 profile, is RECOMMENDED.

So basically this allows for other name types.
OK.  I added the explanation for "hostname" and the reference to
GSS_Import_name, that were both lost, so the entire sentence now
reads:

     <t>(**) - Use of server's principal names having
	GSS_C_NT_HOSTBASED_SERVICE name type and "service@hostname"
	format, where "service" is the service name specified in the
	protocol's profile, and "hostname" is the fully qualified host
	name of the server, is RECOMMENDED.  The desired server name
I would change "desired" to "recommended", but otherwise this looks Ok.

	is generated by calling GSS_Import_name with input_name_type
	of GSS_C_NT_HOSTBASED_SERVICE and input_name_string of
	"service@hostname".</t>

Perhaps GS1 should have a similar update, in AUTH48 or so.
I can do, if others agree.