Re: [wss] [ISSUE 404] RFC 4120 and 1510 (Action required)

[Anthony Nadalin <drsecure@us.ibm.com>]

The only thing added was a few TicketFlags which still fall inside the original TicketFlags size, and NONCE is also already in 1510. So really there would be no addtional changes other than the possible statement of adding an addtional URI for 4120. Becuase the changes are dealing with how the KDC handles that extra flag, which fall under the origanal ASN.1 and the Pre-auth methods which are also under the KDC. So, what it comes down to is adding references in the Token Profile to rfc4120, and no other farmat, as it hasn't changed (format of the token). I think that its important we have a way to distinquish between the 2. I'm OK leaving at 1510 for now as we have no immediate plans to implement 4120. If we decide to support 4120 I would want to see an interop to make sure we got things right.

Anthony Nadalin | Work 512.838.0085 | Cell 512.289.4122
Duane Nickull <dnickull@adobe.com>

Duane Nickull <dnickull@adobe.com>

08/25/2005 09:40 AM

To	wss@lists.oasis-open.org
cc
Subject	[wss] [ISSUE 404] RFC 4120 and 1510 (Action required)

To anyone implementing the Kerberos Token Profile 1.0:

There is an action item for clear up by September 6 to determine which
of the RFC's each implementer will support.  If you are involved in the
interop tests OR are planning to implement this profile, please respond
back to me before Sept 5 COB and state which RFC you plan to implement.

This is very important.  If all are implementing RFC 1510, the spec
might not be updated to reflect the fact that RFC 4120 "obsoletes" RFC
1510.  If you do not reply, the spec may be updated to reflect RFC 4120
which may have implications.

Thanks

Duane Nickull

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that
generates this mail.  You may a link to this group and all your TCs in OASIS
at:
https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php