Subject: Draft 1.0 of Kerberos WG minutes - San Diego meeting, 12/11/00

From: "Douglas E. Engert" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 12 Dec 2000 09:11:03 -0600

[First Draft of the minutes. Comments and corrections for the minutes
are requested, but hold comments or updates on the issues raised until 
later.]

Coments on the 
The second meeting of the Kerberos WG was held on 12/11/00 with 147 attendees,
twice as many at the first meeting. The Kerberos-Revisions is still the top
priority of the working group, as most other drafts are waiting for it.

Cliff Neuman ran the discussion of the revisions, doing it section by section.

Section 1, no comments, but see name canonicalization below. 

Section 2, questions where raised about unrecognized KDC flags, and it was
agreed that they could be ignored by the client, accept in the case 
when the anonymous bit was set. 

Section 3, name canonicalization is still of major concern. Sam Hartman 
suggested that maybe it be deferred to a separate document, as it originally was. 
Cliff was concerned that name canonicalization addresses concerns with 
using unsecured DNS instead and was important.  Jeff Hutzelman suggested 
that it introduced new problems too. I suggested that maybe parts of it be 
left in, to accommodate only host name mapping. Sam Hartman, Jeff Hutzelman and 
Ken Raeburn are to comment to the list on this. Unfortunately no one 
for Microsoft was present to comment. (John Brezak was scheduled to attend,
but has travel problems.)      

Section 4, no comments.

Section 5, Tom Yu had major concerns about backward compatibility, especially
with extra fields and checksums being added to many of the messages. He suggested
new message types rather then modifying current messages, and a new KRB_SAFE type
be added for use with GSSAPI. Matt Hur questioned if this was just a version
number change. But Tom said the version is buried within messages and could not
be checked until after the message had been parsed. Cliff said it could be done
by adding new message types for the APPLICATION. There was general consensus 
of 17-2 that using the APPLICATION was acceptable. Jeff Hutzelman requested it
be extensible so we don't have the same problem again. Tom needs to comment to
the list again on which messages need to be added, as he had quite a few. A 
comment was made that even though the version number has not change from 5, this
might be Kerberos 6 or 7 that is being defined. 

Section 6, was commented out in the current draft, as there where many 
questions. There are two 3des implementations, one with Key Derivation,
and AES is coming, which can also use key derivation, which may be different. 
Each many also have its own string-to-key functions. Ken suggested that we 
not wait for AES. (see below) Sam said, even if we define both 3des but 
without AES, we will still need to make one mandatory. Ken and Cliff will be 
meeting later to hash out some of these issues and report back to the list.

Section 8, Matt Crawford asked where one could go to get new numbers defined
such as IANA. By consensus of 20-1, the requirement that port 88 be the KDC 
port will be changed to recommended, so that a site could run more then
one KDC on separate ports. Pat Moore would like the NT_SRV_HOST name constraints
be less restrictive, so as to work with DCE service names. He will get this to 
Cliff again, as Cliff was still uncomfortable with it. 

Jeff Altman asked again what happened to the Unicode vs UTF8, and questioned
what Microsoft was doing with unicode and principal names. Cliff needs to added
this back in to the revisions.

We then moved on to PKINIT. Brian Tung said there was only one minor correction. 
This document has been will scrutinized over the years, and is only waiting
for the Kerberos Revisions. Jeff Schiller suggested that we move this on too
WG last call, even though it is still waiting.  By general consensus, 15-1
we will be doing a WG last call shortly after the meeting. 

Matt Hur, the discussed PKCROSS, which is waiting for PKINIT.

Sasha Medvinsky discussed PKTAPP which is actually informational, describing 
how to use PKINIT.
  
Pat Moore and Tom Yu discussed issues with adding user-to-user to the Kerberos
GSSAPI. Pat had used an old draft from Swift as a starting point and added this
to the MIT distribution. Ted Ts'o pointed out that the gss_init_sec_context 
would need to know the target. Pat said the target is always known with the 
Globus application which needs this feature. Jonathan said the target_name 
should be an IN/OUT parameter. Tom Yu brought up the new message types need 
in the revisions, and it was agreed that these would be added.   

Finally, Matt Hur and Jeff Altman gave a brief overview of the presentation 
they will give at the TLC session, for TLS and KRB5. 

-- 

 Douglas E. Engert  <[email-masked]>
 Argonne National Laboratory
 9700 South Cass Avenue
 Argonne, Illinois  60439 
 (630) 252-5444