My apologies for not getting these out in last call.
One of these (the re-authentication section comment) is serious enough that
I believe it needs to be resolved prior to sending the document on.
Section 1.1.1
old: Typically when considering channel binding
new:
Typicially when considering both EAP and GSS-API channel binding
[JLS] done
Later in the white board example
channel binding should be GSS-API channel binding
[JLS] I don't understand this. The two sentences which talk about the
whiteboard do not have the phrase channel binding in them. The next
sentence would seem to apply to either GSS-API or EAP channel binding.
Which sentence did you think should be changed?
Section 2.3.3
This is unlikely to survive IETF last call unchallenged.
[JLS] Quite correct - this should say - please present your authentication
token
...
<t>
There are circumstances where the server will want to have the
client re-authenticate itself.
These include very long sessions, where the original
authentication is time limited or cases where in order to complete an
operation a different authentication is required.
GSS-EAP does not have any mechanism for the server to initiate a
re-authentication as all authentication operation start from the client.
If a protocol using GSS-EAP needs to support re-authentication
that is initiated by the server, then a request from the server to the
client for the re-authentication to start needs to be placed in the
protocol.
</t>
<t>
Clients can re-use the existing secure connection established by
GSS-API to run the new authentication in by calling GSS_Init_sec_context.
At this point a full re-authentication will be done.
</t>
What do you think needs to be added to this?
Section 3.4
old: shared private key
new: shared session key
[JLS] - Fixed
Section 2.2.2 refers to sectian 6.1 for a description of GSS-API channel
binding; that seems wrong
[JLS] Section 6 has disappeared - so I am killing that portion of the
section.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf
> Of Sam Hartman
> Sent: Wednesday, September 04, 2013 6:04 AM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: [abfab] [Sam Hartman] comments on draft-ietf-abfab-arch
>
> Sent from wrong address.
>
_______________________________________________
abfab mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/abfab
