Subject: Kerberos clarifications comments: section 7.5.1

From: "Liqiang(Larry) Zhu" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 4 Jul 2004 12:54:43 -0700

Cliff, 

Thanks for posting the update and we absolutely need to ship this one
ASAP. Section 7.5.1 should have been updated with the GSS number
changes, but that can be handled in the authors' last 24 hours.  The
current version has a lot of formatting changes that made it hard for me
to find the real changes, if you can post your NROFF version of draft
-05, it will help me (and perhaps other fellow wg members) to review the
changes in -06.

Thanks,

Larry

-----Original Message-----
From: [email-masked]
[mailto:[email-masked]] On Behalf Of Clifford
Neuman
Sent: Thursday, July 01, 2004 5:10 PM
To: [email-masked]
Subject: Hopefully final Kerberos clarifications

A new internet draft for Kerberos clarifications was submitted earlier
this week.  This will hopfully be the final version and will be
resubmitted to the IESG for approval.  I have not seen the announcement
yet from internet-drafts, but in the meantime, you can find the new
draft at:

   http://www.kerberos.info

by following the link to status of Kerberos clarifications.

Clifford Neuman

---

From: Jeffrey Hutzelman <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 04 Jul 2004 18:43:39 -0400

> -05, it will help me (and perhaps other fellow wg members) to review the

Indeed, this version _should_ contain only a handful of changes that were 
needed to deal with remaining IESG comments.  Unfortunately, I'm also 
having a hard time comparing to the previous version, which is making it 
quite hard to tell whether I should tell Russ this is the final document.

-- Jeff

---

From: Clifford Neuman <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 5 Jul 2004 05:53:32 -0700 (PDT)

I will repost the link to version 5 nroff.  This had very few changes,
but among them was dealing with all the complaints about end-notes, so
I moved the end notes into the body of the document.

Cliff

---

From: Clifford Neuman <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 5 Jul 2004 06:04:48 -0700 (PDT)

The clarifications page off kerberos.info now has a link also to the
old version 5 nroff for those that want to do diffs.

Clifford Neuman

---

From: Jeffrey Hutzelman <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 07 Jul 2004 21:02:01 -0400

On Thursday, July 08, 2004 00:37:24 +0200 Simon Josefsson <[email-masked]> 
wrote:

> Rfcdiff output may help.  Below the "real" differences are marked in
> blue:
>
> http://josefsson.org/shishi/draft-ietf-krb-wg-kerberos-clarifications-06-
> from-5.diff.html

Wow.  That is really useful.

I've read over the document, and I am satisfied that Simon's text has been 
incorporated.  A couple of problems have crept in, but nothing too hard to 
fix:

In section 3.1, the first line after the summary table is missing.

The footnotes that were inlined in that section would probably be better in 
parentheses.

Finally, we have the outstanding issue regarding XOR'ing a protocol key 
with a random number, in section 3.3.1.  I'm inclined to agree with Sam and 
Ken that the sentence under discussion should simply be deleted.

The first two items can definitely be fixed during the author's 48 hours.

The last item is not a substantive change in the protocol.  It drops advice 
that was never correct in the first place.  Unless I hear an objection from 
the working group in the next couple of days, I'm inclined to assert that 
this item can also be handled during the author's 48 hours.

Cliff, can you ACK that you will deal with these three items during the 
authors 48 hours period?  I will keep them on my issues list to make sure 
we don't lose track of them.

Assuming there are no other objections, on Friday evening I will send mail 
to Russ indicating that clarifications-06 is ready for IESG approval, and 
including a complete copy of my summary of the issues raised by the IESG 
and our responses.

-- Jeff

---

From: Clifford Neuman <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 8 Jul 2004 13:01:18 -0700

I will deal with these during the 48 hours.  I will post a draft by
tomorrow with these dealt with, but which will be submitted as the
updates during that 48 hours.

Cliff

   Date: Wed, 07 Jul 2004 21:02:01 -0400
   From: Jeffrey Hutzelman <[email-masked]>

   -- Jeff

---

From: Clifford Neuman <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 9 Jul 2004 22:43:25 -0700 (PDT)

Date: Wed, 07 Jul 2004 21:02:01 -0400
   From: Jeffrey Hutzelman <[email-masked]>
   Cc: [email-masked]
   Content-Disposition: inline

I have made the changes to a draft-07 .nroff available on
clarifications links kerberos.info.  I have not submitted this
version, but it is there so that it can go in at the time for the
Author's 48 hours.   All of the changes suggested on the list have
been made.

I will note that where you suggested  for section 3.1 that:

I made this change for both of the previous footnotes, and I agree
that for the first of the footnotes in this section it made sense, but
for the second one, the change probably wasn't necessary, since it
seemed to fit fine without the parenthesis.  

Cliff