Dave Cridland wrote:
> Just a quick note on the just-ended SASL WG meeting at IETF70, which I
> listened to and read through on the chatroom. 

Thanks for the note. Unfortunately I was travelling at the time and
unable to attend in person.

> Of importance to XMPP/XSF:
> 
> DIGEST-MD5 is likely to be made historic soon - the document will be
> going to working group last call very shortly. This is okay, I think as...
> 
> SCRAM is looking near completion, however there is a significant
> proportion of the WG which would like to see it as a GS2 (ie, GSSAPI)
> mechanism, exposed through SASL. I'm personally a little nervous about
> this, I'm thinking in particular that this may cause additional
> implementation complexity. If you have a strong opinion either way, you
> may wish to join the WG and make your feelings known.
> 
> There was also a discussion about legacy authentication mechanisms, and,
> in particular, how clients ought to choose between (for example) a
> legacy plaintext mechanism like XEP-0078 and SASL PLAIN. The consensus
> seemed to be that it's up to the protocol to tell clients what to do. I
> think XEP-0078 covers us for this - it clearly states it's deprecated -
> but we may want to review that and double-check.
> 
> Finally, I had an interesting chat with Nico Williams on channel
> binding, which might help people understand that area of security a
> little better. It's at the end of the logs, which I can't quite recall a
> URL for, but I'll dig one out if anyone wants it.

http://www.ietf.org/meetings/ietf-logs/sasl/2007-12-05.html

Peter

-- 
Peter Saint-Andre
https://stpeter.im/

Attachment: smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature

Reply via email to