Hi Alexey,
Your responses in this and your other email address all of my comments.
Thanks!
Ben.
On Oct 2, 2009, at 12:31 PM, Alexey Melnikov wrote:
On Thu, Sep 24, 2009 at 2:22 AM, Ben Campbell <ben@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
[...]
Minor issues:
[...]
-- section 4, first paragraph: "...as long as this alternative name
doesn’t
conflict with any other hash function name from the IANA "Hash
Function
Textual Names" registry."
What prevents future conflicts if someone registers a name that
conflicts
with the short name?
Good point.
Should the short-names be IANA registered to prevent
this?
This is a good idea. I've added:
Such alternative name SHOULD be registered in the IANA
"Hash Function Textual Names" registry.
(Should future names be limited to 9 chars?)
I would rather not put extra restrictions on another registry due to
limitations on SASL mechanism names.
I would also note that the likelyhood of registering another SCRAM
mechanism name is quite low, and the likelyhood of the conflict
described above is even lower, so I wouldn't worry too much about this
case anyway.
_______________________________________________
Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf