Subject: Re: [Fwd: Re: Kerberos Revisions and UTF8]

From: Jeffrey Altman <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 8 Aug 2001 17:48:06 EDT

> > I think we are going to have to accept that the Revisions document
> > will be limited to ASCII.
> 
> Microsoft won't like that, but then, maybe they won't care...
> 
> I'd love to hear what they are willing to settle for.

There was never any mention of UTF8 in any of the Kerberos RFCs or
Revisions drafts.  My guess is that they are going to be happy to be
in violation of the spec.  Besides what else can they do?

> > Then a subsequent version of Kerberos supporting UTF8 will have to be
> > issued with a higher version number.  In that version we can break the
> > compatibility of some of the data structures.
> 
> Ick. Kerberos VI? Just to deal with UTF8? Transition issues...

UTF8 would not be the only change that requires a revision to the
version number.  I seem to remember pulling out some proposed changes
because they were unsupportable given the current definitions of the
data structures.  The choices were either

  update the version number

  introduce new extended messages to support the new options

  remove the feature from revisions

Tom and Sam probably have a better memory / knowledge of the
compromises that were made.

 - Jeff

 Jeffrey Altman * Sr.Software Designer      C-Kermit 8.0 Beta available
 The Kermit Project @ Columbia University   includes Secure Telnet and FTP
 http://www.kermit-project.org/             using Kerberos, SRP, and 
 [email-masked]          OpenSSL.  SSH soon to follow.