Re: Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-sasl-gs2-18

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

 



Hi Nico,

Nicolas Williams wrote:

13.3.  Additional Recommendations

 If the application requires security layers then it MUST prefer the
 SASL "GSSAPI" mechanism over "GS2-KRB5" or "GS2-KRB5-PLUS".

Spencer (minor): If "prefer the mechanism" is the right way to describe this, I apologize, but I don't know what the MUST means in practice - if this needs to be at MUST strength, I'd expect text like "MUST use X and MUST NOT use Y or Z", or "MUST use X unless the server doesn't support X".
Agreed, we should express a MUST NOT instead of a MUST:

  If a SASL application requires security layers then it MUST NOT use
  GS2 mechanisms.  Such an application SHOULD use a SASL mechanism that
  does provide security layers, such as GS1 mechanisms.
There is no such thing as GS1, it should be GSSAPI. Otherwise the new text is Ok.


_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Fedora Users]