Subject: KRB WG & jabber, set-passwd draft

From: Nicolas Williams <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2003 15:06:49 -0800

> [14:26] <warlord> Ok, this DOES work.

I tried, I really tried, but could not figure out how to get the either
the jabber browser interface, or the Windows jabber client to work so I
could be on-line during the meeting.  Any hints would be greatly
appreciated.  A link off of the IETF pages would be very nice (and if I
missed it I'll eat these words :)

(I bet I wasn't using the correct jabber chat site - that is, I bet
 demo.jabber.com wasn't the right place to go; but that's what
 http://conference.ietf.jabber.com pointed at...)

So, I'm looking at the logs now.

> [14:34] <hartmans> Did Nico ever post this draft to the list?

I did post the draft last night - obviously not early enough for the WG
participants to have a good look at it before the meeting.  I worked on
it through the weekend and would have had it out last week but for a
minor, but painful and incapacitating back injury last week.

> [14:44] <jhutz> why does nico seem to think that ensuring the module is valid and specifies something that is both correct and what you want is "haggling"

I was thinking that there will be plenty of suggestions for improvement
of the ASN.1 module.  I was also thinking that my use of CHOICE might
revive past controversies.  That's what I meant by "haggling" - I
wanted to imply that a discussion about the proper design for the
protocol structures should take place (perhaps "haggling" was not the
right word).  The desire to avoid the CHOICE controversy led me to put
in a section describing the DER TLV layouts for the various ASN.1 types
so as to show just how CHOICEs affect the bits on the wire.

> [14:45] <hartmans> Doug: Is Nico talking to people or off in his own world
> [14:45] <hartmans> MIT and Microsoft both seem to be looking.

I've made the structural changes that I said I would[*], and just a
little bit more.  In any case I mostly wrote it up over the last three
weeks - it had to simmer in my mind earlier; and talking to Sam about it
at Connectathon '03 was very helpful (that's where the get aliases
feature came from; I think that's a very useful, and maybe crucial
feature).

[*] I discussed the changes I wanted to make with the previous authors
    and others, but not on the list - I should have posted on the list
    earlier, my apologies.

> [15:04] <hartmans> Someone needs to review Nico's set change password for unicode issues

Yes, and not just Unicode.  ASN.1 too.

I want to get a quick resolution on the acceptability of the new ASN.1
module.  That's the main thing, I think.

There are several comments in the draft about possible ways to simplify
or improve the ASN.1 module further.  Particularly the set keys request
and response and the use of UTF8String vs. LangTaggedText - the latter
complicates the encodings a bit, but simplifies the module and is more
flexible than sending the server's chosen language tag independently of
UTF8String text fields (though in the same reply).  I definitely want
some advice from the WG in these areas.

Cheers,

Nico
--