Subject: [Ietf-krb-wg] IETF74 krb-wg minutes

From: Larry Zhu <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 24 Apr 2009 11:20:52 -0700

I have posted the krb-wg meeting minutes for IETF74 at http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/09mar/minutes/krb-wg.txt. Please send Jeff and me your comments or corrections.

Thanks,

--Larry
_______________________________________________
ietf-krb-wg mailing list
[email-masked]
https://lists.anl.gov/mailman/listinfo/ietf-krb-wg

---

From: Simon Josefsson <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 24 Apr 2009 22:39:15 +0200

Larry Zhu <[email-masked]> writes:

> I have posted the krb-wg meeting minutes for IETF74 at
> http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/09mar/minutes/krb-wg.txt. Please send
> Jeff and me your comments or corrections.

This part related to krb5starttls

  We decided that starttls should require certificate validation using
  pre-shared certificates.

does not match my recollection of the meeting.  First, I don't recall
that any decisions were made at all for krb5starttls during the meeting,
instead it was referred to the list.  Secondly, I think what we actually
discussed and had some agreement on was to NOT require certificate
validation.  See jabber discussions at the beginning of:

http://jabber.ietf.org/logs/krb-wg/2009-03-24.txt

Further, this part of the summary:

  The intended status of the starttls document was also not decided and
  it was only discussed briefly in the jabber room.

I don't see any discussion about the intended status in the jabber logs?
As far as I recall from the IETF 73 meeting, it was suggested that both
krb5starttls and FAST would move forward as experimental.  I think it
would be better to move forward both as standards track, but if the WG
feels otherwise I would accept that.  Is this the current thinking?
What is the current thinking about document status of FAST and
krb5starttls?

/Simon

---

From: Larry Zhu <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 24 Apr 2009 13:43:32 -0700

That part of the minutes was taken verbatim from Jeff's note. I will double check the notes and Shawn's scribe and post an update as necessary. Thanks,

--Larry

-----Original Message-----
From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]] On Behalf Of Simon Josefsson
Sent: Friday, April 24, 2009 1:39 PM
To: Larry Zhu
Cc: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [Ietf-krb-wg] IETF74 krb-wg minutes

/Simon

---

From: Jeffrey Hutzelman <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 24 Apr 2009 18:58:46 -0400

--On Friday, April 24, 2009 01:43:32 PM -0700 Larry Zhu 
<[email-masked]> wrote:

> That part of the minutes was taken verbatim from Jeff's note. I will
> double check the notes and Shawn's scribe and post an update as
> necessary. Thanks,

My notes were intended as notes to myself on points that might require some 
followup by me, and while many of the items in those notes correspond 
directly to things that happened in the meeting, not all do.

The item in question refers to a proposal I intended to make on this list, 
which I haven't yet had time to do and which was not discussed in the 
meeting.  The core of that proposal was to take the starttls document as it 
stood at the time of the meeting, modulo the outcome of the certificate 
validation discussion which was still going on at that point.

-- Jeff