Re: Holding gs2

[Sam Hartman <hartmans-ietf@xxxxxxx>]

>>>>> "Simon" == Simon Josefsson <simon@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:

    Simon> Sam Hartman <hartmans-ietf@xxxxxxx> writes:
    >> I have a question for the SASL working group.  With the
    >> exception of the question I brought up about optimal round
    Simon> I fear this would delay GS2 implementations for Kerberos
    Simon> V5, which would give us useful feedback on other aspects of
    Simon> the document.

Are there any implementers of SASL or Kerberos stacks who plan to delay?

    Simon> How about a compromise: publish GS2 soon but specify that
    Simon> it is ONLY to be used with Kerberos V5, i.e., the
    Simon> GS2-QLJHGJLWNPLMQRNK mechanism.  This will lead to
    Simon> implementation experience for this particular use of GS2,
    Simon> while making it possible to make changes that are relevant
    Simon> for non-Kerberos mechanisms, when such experience has
    Simon> established itself.

I think this is a really bad idea.  It could get us into a situation
where we have three standards for kerberos and SASL.  Or where we have
mechanisms that you should not use with GS2 other than negotiation
mechanisms.  That seems like a bad idea to me.