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

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




Peter Saint-Andre wrote:

SECTION 4

Typo: "hashed function" => "hash function"

I think the following text is slightly ambiguous:

  The "-PLUS" suffix is used only when the server supports channel
  binding to the external channel.  In this case the server will
  advertise both, SCRAM-SHA-1 and SCRAM-SHA-1-PLUS, otherwise the
  server will advertise only SCRAM-SHA-1.  The "-PLUS" exists to allow
  negotiation of the use of channel binding.  See Section 6.

This could be read to mean that if a server does not support channel
bindings, then it will advertise only all and only SCRAM-SHA-1 (but
never, say, SCRAM-SHA-256). I think we mean that if a server does not
support channel bindings, then it will advertise only mechanisms of the
form SCRAM-SHA-length and never mechanisms of the form
SCRAM-SHA-length-PLUS (thus not forbidding support for hash functions
other than SHA-1).
Alexey and I talked about this in Stockholm. I suggest the following text:

  The "-PLUS" suffix is used only when the server supports channel
  binding to the external channel.  If the server supports channel
  binding, it will advertise both the "bare" and "plus" versions of
  whatever mechanisms it supports (e.g., if the server supports only
  SCRAM with SHA-1 then it will advertise support for both SCRAM-SHA-1
  and SCRAM-SHA-1-PLUS); if the server does not support channel
  binding, then it will advertise only the "bare" version of the
  mechanism (e.g., only SCRAM-SHA-1).  The "-PLUS" exists to allow
  negotiation of the use of channel binding.  See Section 6.
Ok, this text will be in -04.