Subject: [Ietf-krb-wg] Anonymous issue A023 not resolved

From: Jeffrey Hutzelman <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 16 Sep 2009 16:09:29 -0400

It appears the following issue in anonymous was never resolved:

* A023 Apr 07 Ken Raeburn <[email-masked]>
  > Should importing an anonymous Kerberos principal name and calling
  > display_name get NT-ANONYMOUS back as the type, or should NT-ANONYMOUS
  > names only be generated by accept_sec_context?

  @ Implementation-specific; no text needed.

  <hartmans> agree

  <mrex> it is mechanism-specific but should not be implementation-specific;
  <mrex> we need to specify the form to be used.

  [[ We seem to have consensus to use GSS_C_NT_ANONYMOUS with a display
  [[ string as described for GSS_KRB5_NT_PRINCIPAL, and that mechanism
  [[ implementations may not localize.  I have made this assertion on
  [[ the list as of 1-Oct-2008 and will wait a short time for objections.
  [[ Consensus declared on 5-Dec-2008
  [[ PENDING text update ]]

On Dec 5, 2008, I posted a message in which I declared this point resolved. 
While there was ensuing discussion on a number of other points, there was 
no objection raised to resolving this as described.  At that time, I asked 
Larry to update the document to reflect this decision by adding the 
following text to the end of the first paragraph in section 6:

      In addition, this syntax must be used along with the name type
      GSS_C_NT_ANONYMOUS for displaying and exporting the anonymous
      principal with the anonymous realm.

This change needs to be made before I can send this document back to the 
IESG.

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