Subject: Re: [Ietf-krb-wg] Progress of Kerberos 5.3

From: Sam Hartman <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 02 Dec 2007 17:24:20 -0500

>>>>> "Jeffrey" == Jeffrey Hutzelman <[email-masked]> writes:

    Jeffrey> I've been thinking a lot lately about FAST, STARTTLS, the
    Jeffrey> proposal that Sam, Tom, Nico, and Larry made that we
    Jeffrey> talked about in Chicago, and the fact that we haven't
    Jeffrey> made much progress since then on Kerberos 5.3.

I think the real problem is that there is not sufficient implementer
interest in this problem right now.

I'm in the middle of a priority setting excersise in the Kerberos
Consortium and I'm not seeing a lot of demand for Kerberos 5.3
(particularly i18n) among people who are funding my work.

So, we could probably focus on standards work, but we are unlikely to
implement unless that funding comes forward.  Funding FAST without
Kerberos 5.3 or i18n might be doable for me.

I'd love to find a way to fund i18n work.
_______________________________________________
ietf-krb-wg mailing list
[email-masked]
https://lists.anl.gov/mailman/listinfo/ietf-krb-wg