Re: WG Last Call: draft-ietf-sasl-scram-02

[Nicolas Williams <Nicolas.Williams@xxxxxxx>]

On Tue, Jul 28, 2009 at 02:11:45PM +0200, Chris Newman wrote:
>          ...  All this talk of channel binding negotiation is leading in 
> the direction of non-interoperability and is risking the possibility of 
> success with option 3.  ...

There was an unfortunately long thread on that topic.  The consensus
that we reached was that we'd NOT bother with channel binding type
negotiation for now.

I chatted with you and found that your concern is primarily about the
fact that we say that the client SHOULD, not MUST, use tls-unique.  I'm
willing to tighten this to a MUST.

Nico
--