Re: WG Last Call: draft-ietf-sasl-gs2-14

[Simon Josefsson <simon@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Alexey Melnikov <alexey.melnikov@xxxxxxxxx> writes:

> Simon Josefsson wrote:
>
>>Nicolas Williams <Nicolas.Williams@xxxxxxx> writes:
>>  
>>
>>>Jeff Hutzelman points out that RFC2744 specifically requires that all
>>>gss_buffer_t outputs be released.  That wouldn't bother me at all here
>>>(we'd have to say that draft-ietf-sasl-gs2 updates RFC2744), but,
>>>RFC5587 (draft-ietf-kitten-extended-mech-inquiry, in AUTH48) had a
>>>chance to do that and didn't, so I'd say that these output buffers
>>>should be released by the app.
>>>    
>>>
>>Good catch, I have removed the paragraph.  How memory should be managed
>>by applications (i.e., they have to be released) then follows directly
>>from the normative RFC 2744 and GS2 shouldn't say anything about it.
>>Alexey, I hope this resolves your question.
>>  
>>
> Can we say that informatively in the document, considering that this
> mistake was done before?

Yep, the variable descriptions now follows the style used by RFC 2743 to
document this, e.g.:

   o sasl_mech_name UTF-8 STRING -- SASL name for this
     mechanism; caller must release with
     GSS_Release_buffer()

Is this clear enough?

/Simon