Subject: [Ietf-krb-wg] KerberosFlags - why always 0 bit is reserved? Is there any specific reason for doing so?

From: "Srinivas Cheruku" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 3 Jul 2009 13:46:26 +0530

I have not seen any reply from any of the members on the email below.

Can anyone let me know the reason behind not using 0bit?

Thanks,
Srini

From: Srinivas Cheruku [mailto:[email-masked]] 
Sent: 29 June 2009 16:59
To: [email-masked]'
Cc: [email-masked]'
Subject: OTP - KerberosFlags

Hi,

OTP draft uses KerberosFlags as follows:

             OTPFlags ::= KerberosFlags

             -- nextOTP (0)

             -- combine (1)

In RFC 1510/4120, bit 0 is reserved and not used. Is there any good reason
for not using bit 0?

e.g

   TicketFlags     ::= KerberosFlags

           -- reserved(0),

           -- forwardable(1),

           -- forwarded(2),

...

KDCOptions      ::= KerberosFlags

        -- reserved(0),

        -- forwardable(1),

...

APOptions       ::= KerberosFlags

        -- reserved(0),

        -- use-session-key(1),

...

Thanks,
Srini

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

---

From: Larry Zhu <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 2009 14:13:08 +0000

Hi Srinivas, I have asked Tom to look into this and by now you should have seen his response in the list, and the discussion that followed his response.

--Larry

From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]] On Behalf Of Srinivas Cheruku
Sent: Friday, July 03, 2009 1:16 AM
To: [email-masked]
Subject: [Ietf-krb-wg] KerberosFlags - why always 0 bit is reserved? Is there any specific reason for doing so?

Thanks,
Srini

Hi,

In RFC 1510/4120, bit 0 is reserved and not used. Is there any good reason for not using bit 0?
e.g
   TicketFlags     ::= KerberosFlags
           -- reserved(0),
           -- forwardable(1),
           -- forwarded(2),
...

Thanks,
Srini