gmane.ietf.krb-wg

Re: A proposal from Adrian on the des deprecationregistry

Adrian Farrel — 2012-04-26T21:16:47

Hi.

This is a perfectly valid view.

To be clear, you are deprecating the use of the mechanism, but if someone wants to use it, you want to make sure there is a clear code point available so that they can indicate which deprecated mechanism they are using.

Cheers,
Adrian

_______________________________________________
ietf-krb-wg mailing list
ietf-krb-wg< at >lists.anl.gov
https://lists.anl.gov/mailman/listinfo/ietf-krb-wg

Re: A proposal from Adrian on the des deprecationregistry

Sam Hartman — 2012-04-27T13:09:18

If the registry update can be made without process, the person who can
make it Ken Raeburn, the expert for that registry.

Ken, you should feel free to make your own determination about whether
1) you want to act, 2) you have any community support you feel you
need. And if you choose to act see if IANA would be willing to add a
status column.  I have no idea how they would respond to a request from
an expert to do that.
_______________________________________________
ietf-krb-wg mailing list
ietf-krb-wg< at >lists.anl.gov
https://lists.anl.gov/mailman/listinfo/ietf-krb-wg

Re: A proposal from Adrian on the des deprecationregistry

Nico Williams — 2012-04-26T23:53:17

First, no schema was ever specified for this registry, only initial
content.  That initial content implies a minimal schema, but today's
deprecation of enctypes clearly implies that enctypes have at least a
metadata attribute indicating whether they are deprecated or not.  If
we're going to imply important things to the IANA in one case I don't
see why not in another, unless you want to set an example for others,
in which case we should pull the I-D out of the RFC-Editor queue and
start the process over as punishment for not having dotted every t and
crossed every i.  Mind you, I don't think that pulling the I-D is the
right answer -- if we failed, partly the process failed us by putting
IANA's review so late in the process that we now have no clue what
process to follow to fix a trivial bug.

Let's not compromise the quality of the registry by *refusing* to do
the utterly, painfully, obnoxiously obvious thing that is adding a
status column as a result of... an RFC changing the status of an item
in the regi

Re: A proposal from Adrian on the des deprecationregistry

Henry B. Hotz — 2012-04-26T22:35:14

I think what you're saying is that no special action or process should be needed to allow the IANA to publish what the current state of affairs is based on the currently issued publications.

+1 on that.

On Apr 26, 2012, at 1:30 PM, Nico Williams wrote:


------------------------------------------------------
The opinions expressed in this message are mine,
not those of Caltech, JPL, NASA, or the US Government.
Henry.B.Hotz< at >jpl.nasa.gov, or hbhotz< at >oxy.edu

_______________________________________________
ietf-krb-wg mailing list
ietf-krb-wg< at >lists.anl.gov
https://lists.anl.gov/mailman/listinfo/ietf-krb-wg

Re: A proposal from Adrian on the des deprecation registry

Jeffrey Hutzelman — 2012-04-26T21:04:51

Oh, dear, I missed that.  I agree strongly -- it's the enctype that's
deprecated not the number, and the enctype still has a name.  We have
enough problems with people using made-up names for enctypes without
removing the real names from the registry.



I think you are conflating setting the status column to "deprecated",
which should not require additional process beyond making the decision
to deprecate the enctype (which is an _IETF_ action, not something the
IESG does unilaterally) with making the schema change to introduce the
column.  It seems the schema change might require some amount of
process, if for no other reason than that IANA has tried hard over the
last few years to get itself out of the business of making unilateral
decisions about registries and their contents.

Re: A proposal from Adrian on the des deprecationregistry

Nico Williams — 2012-04-26T20:30:49

I would rather not replace deprecated enctypes' names with "deprecated".

I continue to disagree that adding a column to indicate status should
require any additional process.  Adding a column to reflect reality
that has come about through IESG Protocol Action should require no
special process.  RFC3961 does not specify a number of columns, only
tables from which the initial registry contents should be seeded.
Note that IANA could not add arbitrary fields, such as, say, a public
comment field, without approval -- I'm arguing that no process is
required to add a field to reflect an IESG action that is best
represented by the addition of such a field.

However, if a special process were to be insisted on by IANA or the WG
chairs then I propose that WG chair and AD approval during the IANA
phase of RFC editing for this I-D is the right process.  After all,
it's a bug that this I-D says that "there are no IANA Considerations
for this document", and such a bug is to be fixed no later than the
IANA phase of RFC ed

Re: A proposal from Adrian on the des deprecationregistry

Sam Hartman — 2012-04-26T19:53:25

It looks like there ended up being no open issues at the end of today's
telechat, so I think the question now is whether we want to do this in
the future.  Because it looks like des-die-die-die was approved.

I'd really like to thank Stephen, Love and  Tom for their work on this.  The
approval process for this draft was surprisingly challenging given its
content.  I think Stephen really pushed hard to avoid slowing down.

_______________________________________________
ietf-krb-wg mailing list
ietf-krb-wg< at >lists.anl.gov
https://lists.anl.gov/mailman/listinfo/ietf-krb-wg

Re: A proposal from Adrian on the des deprecationregistry

Henry B. Hotz — 2012-04-26T19:32:03

Like Adrian's proposed registry changes.  Don't want to slow down adoption of the draft for it.

On Apr 26, 2012, at 6:14 AM, Sam Hartman wrote:


------------------------------------------------------
The opinions expressed in this message are mine,
not those of Caltech, JPL, NASA, or the US Government.
Henry.B.Hotz< at >jpl.nasa.gov, or hbhotz< at >oxy.edu

_______________________________________________
ietf-krb-wg mailing list
ietf-krb-wg< at >lists.anl.gov
https://lists.anl.gov/mailman/listinfo/ietf-krb-wg

A proposal from Adrian on the des deprecation registry

Sam Hartman — 2012-04-26T13:14:56


IANA's question about whether we should  deprecate code points in the
registry came up during IESG discussion of
draft-ietf-krb-wg-des-die-die-die.
It looks like our discussion is sufficient and we will be able to move
forward with no change if we like.

However, since a specific proposal was made  I'd like to forward it to
the WG in case people start shouting for joy.
we could potentially make the change now if the document doesn't end up
getting approved today and people are very supportive.
Or we could make this with some-numbers-to-iana.

_______________________________________________
ietf-krb-wg mailing list
ietf-krb-wg< at >lists.anl.gov
https://lists.anl.gov/mailman/listinfo/ietf-krb-wg

Re: Call for adoption:draft-josefsson-kerberos5-i18n-01.txt

Tom Yu — 2012-04-25T20:43:58


If it wasn't adequately implied by my earlier message, I'm willing to
review and comment on this draft if we adopt it.  I hope that other
people will speak up, though.
_______________________________________________
ietf-krb-wg mailing list
ietf-krb-wg< at >lists.anl.gov
https://lists.anl.gov/mailman/listinfo/ietf-krb-wg

Re: Call for adoption:draft-josefsson-kerberos5-i18n-01.txt

Sam Hartman — 2012-04-20T16:09:47

I'd really appreciate more comments on this.

How about this:

Who is willing to review this draft and comment on it if we adopt?
_______________________________________________
ietf-krb-wg mailing list
ietf-krb-wg< at >lists.anl.gov
https://lists.anl.gov/mailman/listinfo/ietf-krb-wg

Please review draft-ietf-abfab-gss-eap-06 by May 12012

Sam Hartman — 2012-04-17T20:26:20


HI.  Speaking as an editor in another working gorup.  We'd appreciate
review from the Kerberos community of draft-ietf-abfab-gss-eap-06.  In
particular that draft sets up a registry of RFC 4121 token types in the
Kerberos V GSS-API Parameters Registry that we recently established in
this working group.
Also, we re-use aspects of the RFC 4121 mechanism.

Comments should be sent to abfab< at >ietf.org by May 1, 2012.

Thanks for your consideration

--Sam
_______________________________________________
ietf-krb-wg mailing list
ietf-krb-wg< at >lists.anl.gov
https://lists.anl.gov/mailman/listinfo/ietf-krb-wg

Re: Call for adoption:draft-josefsson-kerberos5-i18n-01.txt

Tom Yu — 2012-04-10T23:10:18


I support the adoption of this draft.  I would prefer that the draft
filename reflect the content more accurately,
e.g., draft-ietf-krb-wg-krb-error-i18n.
_______________________________________________
ietf-krb-wg mailing list
ietf-krb-wg< at >lists.anl.gov
https://lists.anl.gov/mailman/listinfo/ietf-krb-wg

Preliminary minutes uploaded

Sam Hartman — 2012-04-09T19:35:12


I've uploaded prelininary minutes to the meeting materials manager.
_______________________________________________
ietf-krb-wg mailing list
ietf-krb-wg< at >lists.anl.gov
https://lists.anl.gov/mailman/listinfo/ietf-krb-wg

Call for adoption:draft-josefsson-kerberos5-i18n-01.txt

Sam Hartman — 2012-04-09T18:09:04


This message starts a two-week call on wether to adopt
https://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-josefsson-kerberos5-i18n-01.txt as a
draft to address our charter item regarding the internationalization of
Kerberos error messages.

I'd appreciate comments by April 24, 2012.

Sam Hartman
Kerberos co-chair
_______________________________________________
ietf-krb-wg mailing list
ietf-krb-wg< at >lists.anl.gov
https://lists.anl.gov/mailman/listinfo/ietf-krb-wg

Re: des-die-die-die and adding IANA registry statuscolumns

Nico Williams — 2012-04-09T17:49:22

I would like to see a status column in the registry.  I don't think
any special process should be required just to add that column --
process should be required to specify anything other than Protocol
Action for updating the status of any enctype.

Thus I think IANA should just add the column, with "deprecated" only
for the enctypes being deprecated by this I-D.

Nico
--
_______________________________________________
ietf-krb-wg mailing list
ietf-krb-wg< at >lists.anl.gov
https://lists.anl.gov/mailman/listinfo/ietf-krb-wg

Re: des-die-die-die and adding IANA registry status columns

Stephen Farrell — 2012-04-09T16:26:54


On 04/09/2012 04:48 PM, Sam Hartman wrote:

Done. On April 26th telechat.

S
_______________________________________________
ietf-krb-wg mailing list
ietf-krb-wg< at >lists.anl.gov
https://lists.anl.gov/mailman/listinfo/ietf-krb-wg

Re: des-die-die-die and adding IANA registry statuscolumns

Sam Hartman — 2012-04-09T15:48:40

I agree that no one seems to care enough to make a change, so I'd
proceed as-is.
_______________________________________________
ietf-krb-wg mailing list
ietf-krb-wg< at >lists.anl.gov
https://lists.anl.gov/mailman/listinfo/ietf-krb-wg

Re: des-die-die-die and adding IANA registry status columns

Stephen Farrell — 2012-04-09T15:46:17


On 04/09/2012 04:33 PM, Sam Hartman wrote:

And my response is: do whatever the WG want.

If it helps for me to make the call, then leave the document as-is and
proceed.

My reason is nobody seems to care enough to warrant a change.

I don't mind if you take that route or some other.

No point hanging about though.

S.

_______________________________________________
ietf-krb-wg mailing list
ietf-krb-wg< at >lists.anl.gov
https://lists.anl.gov/mailman/listinfo/ietf-krb-wg

Re: des-die-die-die and adding IANA registry statuscolumns

Sam Hartman — 2012-04-09T15:33:22

    Stephen> Folks,

    Stephen> What's the conclusion here? Does die-die-die need a change
    Stephen> for this or not?

Here's what I wrote to Stephen in another message that was not copied to
the WG:

OK, here's where we stand on the IANA thing.

The registry in question doesn't currently record status.  The WG did
not sign up to adding status columns when we wrote des-die-die-die
although perhaps we should have.  A couple of people spoke out in favor
of adding status and deprecating things in the registry if it was easy.
Tom pointed out that if we were going to do that we probably ought to
consider the status of everything else already in that registry and set
it accurately.

So, current status seems to be that no one really objects to updating
the registry if it's easy, no one really strongly supports it. There's
some doubt about whether it's easy or whether it would end up raising
the status of other ciphersuites or macs.

I'm not seeing a strong consensus for change, but no significant
opposition.

Re: des-die-die-die and adding IANA registry status columns

Stephen Farrell — 2012-04-09T14:29:18

Folks,

What's the conclusion here? Does die-die-die need a change for
this or not?

Ta,
S.

On 04/05/2012 08:47 PM, Jeffrey Hutzelman wrote:
_______________________________________________
ietf-krb-wg mailing list
ietf-krb-wg< at >lists.anl.gov
https://lists.anl.gov/mailman/listinfo/ietf-krb-wg