From nobody Thu Mar 1 08:20:47 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: kitten@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: kitten@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0EF7512EB0B for ; Thu, 1 Mar 2018 08:20:46 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.211 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.211 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id WmMntpmMob3a for ; Thu, 1 Mar 2018 08:20:44 -0800 (PST) Received: from dmz-mailsec-scanner-2.mit.edu (dmz-mailsec-scanner-2.mit.edu [18.9.25.13]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9CC4512EB08 for ; Thu, 1 Mar 2018 08:20:44 -0800 (PST) X-AuditID: 1209190d-af9ff700000060ab-76-5a98285addd7 Received: from mailhub-auth-4.mit.edu ( [18.7.62.39]) (using TLS with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by dmz-mailsec-scanner-2.mit.edu (Symantec Messaging Gateway) with SMTP id 09.C7.24747.B58289A5; Thu, 1 Mar 2018 11:20:43 -0500 (EST) Received: from outgoing.mit.edu (OUTGOING-AUTH-1.MIT.EDU [18.9.28.11]) by mailhub-auth-4.mit.edu (8.13.8/8.9.2) with ESMTP id w21GKdRG030316 for ; Thu, 1 Mar 2018 11:20:41 -0500 Received: from kduck.kaduk.org (24-107-191-124.dhcp.stls.mo.charter.com [24.107.191.124]) (authenticated bits=56) (User authenticated as kaduk@ATHENA.MIT.EDU) by outgoing.mit.edu (8.13.8/8.12.4) with ESMTP id w21GKaYS027994 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT) for ; Thu, 1 Mar 2018 11:20:39 -0500 Date: Thu, 1 Mar 2018 10:20:36 -0600 From: Benjamin Kaduk To: kitten@ietf.org Message-ID: <20180301162036.GR50954@kduck.kaduk.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.1 (2017-09-22) X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFjrBIsWRmVeSWpSXmKPExsUixG6nrhutMSPKYN0DLYujm1exODB6LFny kymAMYrLJiU1J7MstUjfLoErY+Wn/2wFP/gr5k1sZm1gfM3TxcjJISFgIvHq+hXGLkYuDiGB xUwSc/a9YYZwjjFKNM26BpV5xSSx6u1iVpAWFgEVibansxhBbDYgu6H7MjOILSIgLLF76zsw WxgovmXyY6AaDg5eoBUzH3qDhHkFBCVOznzCAmIzC2hJ3Pj3kgmkhFlAWmL5Pw6QsKiAssTe vkPsExh5ZyHpmIWkYxZCxwJG5lWMsim5Vbq5iZk5xanJusXJiXl5qUW6Rnq5mSV6qSmlmxhB gcQpybuD8d9dr0OMAhyMSjy8AjwzooRYE8uKK3MPMUpyMCmJ8ta/mh4lxJeUn1KZkVicEV9U mpNafIhRgoNZSYT39PZpUUK8KYmVValF+TApaQ4WJXFedxPtKCGB9MSS1OzU1ILUIpisDAeH kgTvMnWgPYJFqempFWmZOSUIaSYOTpDhPEDDWYGRJ8RbXJCYW5yZDpE/xajLcePF6zZmIZa8 /LxUKXHeDpBBAiBFGaV5cHNACUAie3/NK0ZxoLeEeTVBqniAyQNu0iugJUxAS458ngKypCQR ISXVwPi4xHKtjF2MxnKbnRFte/KfMTVt0XJ+nOXyyXJ96dzc9l981euS3t/eHXr954zT0+8F x+e2RUz0Om2d0elpHhzUGX3NM79xDfdLDZmfObqZGzQfmq1cMe3v7mcid5V0FR/Mv5N4b5VK paygRPeRRr7nz+zDFW/ueVKalVHSOjP3l0FYgtaSuUosxRmJhlrMRcWJAHfrD5nbAgAA Archived-At: Subject: [kitten] The future of the kitten WG X-BeenThere: kitten@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: Common Authentication Technologies - Next Generation List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 01 Mar 2018 16:20:46 -0000 Hi all, The NomComm has selected me as the next Security AD, so I will need to step down as kitten chair by the London meeting. I do not want to ask Matt to take on the entire WG-chairing burden himself, though he is willing to help train/mentor a new chair if needed. If we do not have sufficient staffing in the chair role, it seems likely that we will need to close the WG. Closing the WG does not mean that work on Kerberos, SASL, and its other chartered topics cannot happen anymore -- rather, it just means that such work would need to happen in a different route, perhaps making use of the new secdispatch WG for advice on how to do so. Direct AD sponsorship of drafts is also a possibility that I'd be willing to pursue. As a brief overview, the WG chair is tasked with running WG sessions at physical IETF meetings (if any occur), judging WG consensus, including soliciting additional reviews if needed to judge consensus, and shepherding documents through their lifecycle/approval process (both through the formal "document shepherd" role and otherwise). There are documentation and checklists available to help with the process side of things, and it is not necessary to have deep technical expertise on the subject matter in order to perform the role. (Some familiarity or willingness to obtain familiarity with the technical topics is needed, in order to be able to judge consensus and determine the seriousness of any potential issues that may arise during discussion of documents and their impact on WG consensus.) Since kitten has not regularly been scheduling sessions at physical IETF meetings, it is likely that a travel budget is not needed, though it is still recommended to talk to your management about the additional involvement and time commitment. Please let me know if you think you might be interested in the WG chair role for kitten -- I'm happy to have a conversation about the details of the role and how it might interact with your situation. Thanks, Ben From nobody Thu Mar 1 08:23:00 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: kitten@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: kitten@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CB93D12EB13 for ; Thu, 1 Mar 2018 08:22:58 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.92 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.92 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HK_RANDOM_FROM=1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id V_KGnDv84-ac for ; Thu, 1 Mar 2018 08:22:56 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-lf0-f66.google.com (mail-lf0-f66.google.com [209.85.215.66]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5D41B12EB14 for ; Thu, 1 Mar 2018 08:22:56 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-lf0-f66.google.com with SMTP id m69so9169666lfe.8 for ; Thu, 01 Mar 2018 08:22:56 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=ZkxJYISdVx1ncW8BhWoZ8xYxwyxW5PrkXlLtBI6bg3Y=; b=DG9CIRr9oHT/Lgmh2M/awHTEgsJ29XLtlYDVaV452ErsYpWBBs4v0B0ug8wZaLLmsw KFVcoQKzQ7c+leCQbzDWT1B6I1N5av8p+IXlhNgZyUdp4IInPrl5kURBQDTyINMKu82k jc3zDk66HIgotbhGEW+81PPiRtByawJV0jG3sM5heGXLwoNFPjRbRrAr5DIvLWRKuyv2 XbQr61EV9eg+AagouZpHa3rpxryvXrDhKZnFMzXkL2V5rMRwpwhQkWbtOzyVnPaEUY1j 75rNKoF1OV80cBz7/PBy545fKw+AFE3sz8QELAm/W7GBvqOakjmg8cltK6Nv435E3cmC tS+A== X-Gm-Message-State: AElRT7E0WyPwCUxouoaRZ/fAczpvyV4kOXQT9NY8lmuih137cFsUmuCN SQVQARCmt5DGKDKJ0Dx+8TCmn77OeOdgyRyTFEV+aQ== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AG47ELvkPdl3yBxucfpA1HwkCZtV1At/aYTqPIh4P0eG7soOrOGzo96QxCy726xMun+w778lq6Q7buGYzOOASG719wI= X-Received: by 10.25.229.129 with SMTP id i1mr1901614lfk.66.1519921374455; Thu, 01 Mar 2018 08:22:54 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.46.112.3 with HTTP; Thu, 1 Mar 2018 08:22:53 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <20180301162036.GR50954@kduck.kaduk.org> References: <20180301162036.GR50954@kduck.kaduk.org> From: Nathaniel McCallum Date: Thu, 1 Mar 2018 11:22:53 -0500 Message-ID: To: Benjamin Kaduk Cc: kitten@ietf.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Archived-At: Subject: Re: [kitten] The future of the kitten WG X-BeenThere: kitten@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: Common Authentication Technologies - Next Generation List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 01 Mar 2018 16:22:59 -0000 In the case where the WG closes, what would happen to the existing drafts that are actively progressing? On Thu, Mar 1, 2018 at 11:20 AM, Benjamin Kaduk wrote: > Hi all, > > The NomComm has selected me as the next Security AD, so I will need > to step down as kitten chair by the London meeting. > > I do not want to ask Matt to take on the entire WG-chairing burden > himself, though he is willing to help train/mentor a new chair if > needed. If we do not have sufficient staffing in the chair role, > it seems likely that we will need to close the WG. Closing the WG > does not mean that work on Kerberos, SASL, and its other chartered > topics cannot happen anymore -- rather, it just means that such work > would need to happen in a different route, perhaps making use of the > new secdispatch WG for advice on how to do so. Direct AD > sponsorship of drafts is also a possibility that I'd be willing to > pursue. > > As a brief overview, the WG chair is tasked with running WG sessions > at physical IETF meetings (if any occur), judging WG consensus, > including soliciting additional reviews if needed to judge > consensus, and shepherding documents through their > lifecycle/approval process (both through the formal "document > shepherd" role and otherwise). There are documentation and > checklists available to help with the process side of things, and it > is not necessary to have deep technical expertise on the subject > matter in order to perform the role. (Some familiarity or > willingness to obtain familiarity with the technical topics is > needed, in order to be able to judge consensus and determine the > seriousness of any potential issues that may arise during discussion > of documents and their impact on WG consensus.) Since kitten has > not regularly been scheduling sessions at physical IETF meetings, it > is likely that a travel budget is not needed, though it is still > recommended to talk to your management about the additional > involvement and time commitment. > > Please let me know if you think you might be interested in the WG > chair role for kitten -- I'm happy to have a conversation about the > details of the role and how it might interact with your situation. > > Thanks, > > Ben > > _______________________________________________ > Kitten mailing list > Kitten@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/kitten From nobody Thu Mar 1 08:44:31 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: kitten@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: kitten@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 86D6412EB44 for ; Thu, 1 Mar 2018 08:44:29 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.21 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.21 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id VAn2Ehe-t7Gv for ; Thu, 1 Mar 2018 08:44:27 -0800 (PST) Received: from dmz-mailsec-scanner-4.mit.edu (dmz-mailsec-scanner-4.mit.edu [18.9.25.15]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B714712EB3C for ; Thu, 1 Mar 2018 08:44:27 -0800 (PST) X-AuditID: 1209190f-ea1ff70000000215-27-5a982deac14e Received: from mailhub-auth-1.mit.edu ( [18.9.21.35]) (using TLS with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by dmz-mailsec-scanner-4.mit.edu (Symantec Messaging Gateway) with SMTP id 0F.0B.00533.AED289A5; Thu, 1 Mar 2018 11:44:26 -0500 (EST) Received: from outgoing.mit.edu (OUTGOING-AUTH-1.MIT.EDU [18.9.28.11]) by mailhub-auth-1.mit.edu (8.13.8/8.9.2) with ESMTP id w21GiPwr000635; Thu, 1 Mar 2018 11:44:26 -0500 Received: from kduck.kaduk.org (24-107-191-124.dhcp.stls.mo.charter.com [24.107.191.124]) (authenticated bits=56) (User authenticated as kaduk@ATHENA.MIT.EDU) by outgoing.mit.edu (8.13.8/8.12.4) with ESMTP id w21GiMjl013521 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT); Thu, 1 Mar 2018 11:44:24 -0500 Date: Thu, 1 Mar 2018 10:44:22 -0600 From: Benjamin Kaduk To: Nathaniel McCallum Cc: kitten@ietf.org Message-ID: <20180301164422.GU50954@kduck.kaduk.org> References: <20180301162036.GR50954@kduck.kaduk.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.1 (2017-09-22) X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFvrDIsWRmVeSWpSXmKPExsUixCmqrPtKd0aUQfNBNYujm1exWMz9OovV gcljyZKfTB7v911lC2CK4rJJSc3JLEst0rdL4Mo4un47c8FslorHC76yNjBuZe5i5OSQEDCR +D1pMmsXIxeHkMBiJom57e1gCSGBDYwSZ67KQSSuMEn8P3WVDSTBIqAi0f//OwuIzQZkN3Rf BmsQEdCTWLZvAiOIzSwgLLF8zVmwemEBQ4kl09aC1fMCbXuzq5cVYkG1xNLLX9kh4oISJ2c+ YYHo1ZK48e8lUxcjB5AtLbH8HwdImFMgUGLy6Wtg40UFlCX29h1in8AoMAtJ9ywk3bMQuhcw Mq9ilE3JrdLNTczMKU5N1i1OTszLSy3SNdHLzSzRS00p3cQIDlJJ/h2Mcxq8DzEKcDAq8fAK 8syIEmJNLCuuzD3EKMnBpCTKW/9qepQQX1J+SmVGYnFGfFFpTmrxIUYJDmYlEd7T26dFCfGm JFZWpRblw6SkOViUxHndTbSjhATSE0tSs1NTC1KLYLIyHBxKErwndID2CBalpqdWpGXmlCCk mTg4QYbzAA2vAanhLS5IzC3OTIfIn2I05mhb+aSNmePGi9dtzEIsefl5qVLivL+1gUoFQEoz SvPgpoESjUT2/ppXjOJAzwnz8gLTjhAPMEnBzXsFtIoJaNWRz1NAVpUkIqSkGhhDdk6cXhg/ d+kNkb2hCXMPTv+0pvPIn8MrsuZtcmz6I/vm9bVEu5niBSIpzc2qf3foXnt3y2R/zF2jN3dM 29cu/GD3W8s+IMpC1/QMe/y6zo9nf4WGTNjgckxhhkp9cu/62zMDDT8v3dD6R/Dj1wa2Vxsc rb4qV9/zYjw80exT+uS35xJakvhVlViKMxINtZiLihMBnDO3Fg8DAAA= Archived-At: Subject: Re: [kitten] The future of the kitten WG X-BeenThere: kitten@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: Common Authentication Technologies - Next Generation List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 01 Mar 2018 16:44:29 -0000 On Thu, Mar 01, 2018 at 11:22:53AM -0500, Nathaniel McCallum wrote: > In the case where the WG closes, what would happen to the existing > drafts that are actively progressing? I think the question only really applies for rfc5653bis and krb-spake-preauth, right? The former is in the RFC Editor's queue and should be able to stay there, and I would expect the latter to probably continue life as an AD-sponsored document (though that is flexible). The kitten@ietf.org list would presumably remain open for discussion. -Ben From nobody Thu Mar 1 08:46:37 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: kitten@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: kitten@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DB03212EB4B for ; Thu, 1 Mar 2018 08:46:35 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.92 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.92 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HK_RANDOM_FROM=1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id sXVniqRD-3MY for ; Thu, 1 Mar 2018 08:46:34 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-lf0-f49.google.com (mail-lf0-f49.google.com [209.85.215.49]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7FB3212EB3C for ; Thu, 1 Mar 2018 08:46:34 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-lf0-f49.google.com with SMTP id 37so9286268lfs.7 for ; Thu, 01 Mar 2018 08:46:34 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=pNGYLegkETElXnKmO5mvgUvKCt+DEP+twrp1pAJgBvY=; b=ZdBe+GhuRb9OF/YjCyfqr13xZXONU/oBmla3LoVi48vYa6kpl+ISc2/gYa0W7xSduR 5zPAcfd0yYtlsFPGQ41f8BIc6QmOp9J4W52TOrvs0CK4zxv9w7tkF5VGKBGoGpuCxA6T wzfXbWX6Y3sJntYCfaW9hLnBJN+FusDEzzeAc4XcjUrDgxj+a2WOBr2LHl2fbpShnL/W yUaC9Rm1lDeW1sFNDmit+L9DJgWX4tj4ZrLQpuKTE7/+QMQHFKHuujB+tjmgZNGUw1Ua q50S9PH/f1fuyVWQuf5G6UIWtdUmJc3iJ/Qg+HeShlULJa0XT/3yA/UP0CX49NYndfBt OyGQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AElRT7EgWVu/jdAyJHR6QO+ez/w4U2b9nKr5GUXzuLhPHJ5g7eZrugjT YDUdGTtnPqFTaTeHhxLIlRa186RKZePEmh1VuF5cv38anwU= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AG47ELs206/RIGm+p0bOFXcPliryWY+mB2QPYUdiewE2/bblhgwnvWrVAMZbbwGmDn7wvMnJqGjLwY2ONoX3AvdjkCc= X-Received: by 10.46.127.4 with SMTP id a4mr1767234ljd.71.1519922792622; Thu, 01 Mar 2018 08:46:32 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.46.112.3 with HTTP; Thu, 1 Mar 2018 08:46:31 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <20180301164422.GU50954@kduck.kaduk.org> References: <20180301162036.GR50954@kduck.kaduk.org> <20180301164422.GU50954@kduck.kaduk.org> From: Nathaniel McCallum Date: Thu, 1 Mar 2018 11:46:31 -0500 Message-ID: To: Benjamin Kaduk Cc: kitten@ietf.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Archived-At: Subject: Re: [kitten] The future of the kitten WG X-BeenThere: kitten@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: Common Authentication Technologies - Next Generation List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 01 Mar 2018 16:46:36 -0000 Would it be possible to progress krb-spake-preauth? We've had a number of reviews and many iterations. We also have a working implementation. Is there anything else we are waiting for? On Thu, Mar 1, 2018 at 11:44 AM, Benjamin Kaduk wrote: > On Thu, Mar 01, 2018 at 11:22:53AM -0500, Nathaniel McCallum wrote: >> In the case where the WG closes, what would happen to the existing >> drafts that are actively progressing? > > I think the question only really applies for rfc5653bis and > krb-spake-preauth, right? The former is in the RFC Editor's queue and > should be able to stay there, and I would expect the latter to > probably continue life as an AD-sponsored document (though that is > flexible). The kitten@ietf.org list would presumably remain open > for discussion. > > -Ben From nobody Thu Mar 1 08:51:13 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: kitten@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: kitten@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0463712EAE9 for ; Thu, 1 Mar 2018 08:51:12 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.21 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.21 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id xCdZyK4ygkeP for ; Thu, 1 Mar 2018 08:51:10 -0800 (PST) Received: from dmz-mailsec-scanner-7.mit.edu (dmz-mailsec-scanner-7.mit.edu [18.7.68.36]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F2E2A12DA1D for ; Thu, 1 Mar 2018 08:51:09 -0800 (PST) X-AuditID: 12074424-9cbff70000003b5a-86-5a982f7a2acc Received: from mailhub-auth-4.mit.edu ( [18.7.62.39]) (using TLS with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by dmz-mailsec-scanner-7.mit.edu (Symantec Messaging Gateway) with SMTP id CC.A8.15194.B7F289A5; Thu, 1 Mar 2018 11:51:08 -0500 (EST) Received: from outgoing.mit.edu (OUTGOING-AUTH-1.MIT.EDU [18.9.28.11]) by mailhub-auth-4.mit.edu (8.13.8/8.9.2) with ESMTP id w21Gp32t004401; Thu, 1 Mar 2018 11:51:04 -0500 Received: from kduck.kaduk.org (24-107-191-124.dhcp.stls.mo.charter.com [24.107.191.124]) (authenticated bits=56) (User authenticated as kaduk@ATHENA.MIT.EDU) by outgoing.mit.edu (8.13.8/8.12.4) with ESMTP id w21GoxwS018532 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT); Thu, 1 Mar 2018 11:51:02 -0500 Date: Thu, 1 Mar 2018 10:51:00 -0600 From: Benjamin Kaduk To: Nathaniel McCallum Cc: kitten@ietf.org Message-ID: <20180301165059.GV50954@kduck.kaduk.org> References: <20180301162036.GR50954@kduck.kaduk.org> <20180301164422.GU50954@kduck.kaduk.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.1 (2017-09-22) X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFvrOIsWRmVeSWpSXmKPExsUixG6nrlujPyPK4OEacYujm1exWMz9OovV gcljyZKfTB7v911lC2CK4rJJSc3JLEst0rdL4Mr4fPAXW8F7noodC08zNjAu5epi5OSQEDCR WDptAhuILSSwmEmie29hFyMXkL2BUeLfhMPsEM4VJol7V9rYQapYBFQk5sw/xwpiswHZDd2X mUFsEQE9iWX7JjCC2MwCwhLL15wFmyosYCixZNpaFhCbF2jb/aeL2CCGvmWUaOz7DZUQlDg5 8wkLRLOWxI1/L5m6GDmAbGmJ5f84QMKcAoESLTe+gZWICihL7O07xD6BUWAWku5ZSLpnIXQv YGRexSibklulm5uYmVOcmqxbnJyYl5dapGuul5tZopeaUrqJERymLio7GLt7vA8xCnAwKvHw CvDMiBJiTSwrrsw9xCjJwaQkylv/anqUEF9SfkplRmJxRnxRaU5q8SFGCQ5mJRHe09unRQnx piRWVqUW5cOkpDlYlMR5PUy0o4QE0hNLUrNTUwtSi2CyMhwcShK86/SA9ggWpaanVqRl5pQg pJk4OEGG8wANjwOp4S0uSMwtzkyHyJ9i1OW48eJ1G7MQS15+XqqUOO8FkCIBkKKM0jy4OaD0 IpG9v+YVozjQW8K870GqeICpCW7SK6AlTEBLjnyeArKkJBEhJdXAaLb+3w9z3cMuWgXCW92v hC2vrvf4/DhW6I/spFKmdy8M+nqmumUc9dXpucjDHvMqyOVoutkca/NJeiUxRw5tO7zc0fru dS/NmRezv3M8c4v3yWRUaP3CYWcudmpVhZL89tlPz7/YZeP382We5NUNZ+SW7G0WDynOyvra zJFyxdH9KY/w7lUFSizFGYmGWsxFxYkAgKemGAoDAAA= Archived-At: Subject: Re: [kitten] The future of the kitten WG X-BeenThere: kitten@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: Common Authentication Technologies - Next Generation List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 01 Mar 2018 16:51:12 -0000 Realistically, if we were going through the normal WG document process, we probably would not even get an IETF last call before London, since there is a huge "bulge" of documents that are all trying to go through at the moment. (The IESG had to defer several documents and extend their IETF last call in order to actually give the area directorate review teams and the community a reasonable amount of time to actually comment on things.) I'm still looking into the details of what exactly is possible, both technically and by policy. That said, I am pretty confident that krb-spake-preauth will get published as a Proposed Standard, and we are just worrying about the details of how to get here. -Ben On Thu, Mar 01, 2018 at 11:46:31AM -0500, Nathaniel McCallum wrote: > Would it be possible to progress krb-spake-preauth? We've had a number > of reviews and many iterations. We also have a working implementation. > Is there anything else we are waiting for? > > On Thu, Mar 1, 2018 at 11:44 AM, Benjamin Kaduk wrote: > > On Thu, Mar 01, 2018 at 11:22:53AM -0500, Nathaniel McCallum wrote: > >> In the case where the WG closes, what would happen to the existing > >> drafts that are actively progressing? > > > > I think the question only really applies for rfc5653bis and > > krb-spake-preauth, right? The former is in the RFC Editor's queue and > > should be able to stay there, and I would expect the latter to > > probably continue life as an AD-sponsored document (though that is > > flexible). The kitten@ietf.org list would presumably remain open > > for discussion. > > > > -Ben From nobody Sun Mar 4 18:06:46 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: kitten@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: kitten@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 99A8B124B0A for ; Sun, 4 Mar 2018 18:06:44 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.534 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.534 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_SOFTFAIL=0.665, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 3VZFoQ_xg62u for ; Sun, 4 Mar 2018 18:06:42 -0800 (PST) Received: from mailout.easymail.ca (mailout.easymail.ca [64.68.200.34]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AF3941242EA for ; Sun, 4 Mar 2018 18:06:42 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mailout.easymail.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 062BEC0FDC; Mon, 5 Mar 2018 02:06:42 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mailout.easymail.ca ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (emo01-pco.easydns.vpn [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ty7Ft0ILKxRb; Mon, 5 Mar 2018 02:06:41 +0000 (UTC) Received: from macbook-air-2.lan (66-215-86-135.dhcp.psdn.ca.charter.com [66.215.86.135]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mailout.easymail.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id B9096C0FD1; Mon, 5 Mar 2018 02:06:38 +0000 (UTC) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 9.3 \(3124\)) From: "Henry B (Hank) Hotz, CISSP" In-Reply-To: <20180301165059.GV50954@kduck.kaduk.org> Date: Sun, 4 Mar 2018 17:59:39 -0800 Cc: Nathaniel McCallum , kitten@ietf.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <3B784E8A-206C-49AD-8419-6715704096B5@oxy.edu> References: <20180301162036.GR50954@kduck.kaduk.org> <20180301164422.GU50954@kduck.kaduk.org> <20180301165059.GV50954@kduck.kaduk.org> To: Benjamin Kaduk X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3124) Archived-At: Subject: Re: [kitten] The future of the kitten WG X-BeenThere: kitten@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: Common Authentication Technologies - Next Generation List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 05 Mar 2018 02:06:44 -0000 Yay. > On Mar 1, 2018, at 8:51 AM, Benjamin Kaduk wrote: > > That said, I am pretty confident that krb-spake-preauth will get > published as a Proposed Standard, and we are just worrying about the > details of how to get here. Personal email. hbhotz@oxy.edu From nobody Mon Mar 5 08:01:07 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: kitten@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: kitten@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F166612D875 for ; Mon, 5 Mar 2018 08:01:06 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.921 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.921 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HK_RANDOM_FROM=1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id iG3OUrVyiB0z for ; Mon, 5 Mar 2018 08:01:05 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-lf0-f66.google.com (mail-lf0-f66.google.com [209.85.215.66]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 160FF126D74 for ; Mon, 5 Mar 2018 08:01:05 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-lf0-f66.google.com with SMTP id o145so23858536lff.0 for ; Mon, 05 Mar 2018 08:01:04 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=6Z2MnS4qtnQXWzYrAoEoR0+LpUZbwESjAQAY46GItZs=; b=pOmKdmat01fWtWZW1ZTxETf7UoMa1LtIwGUFPijdZSHlTgSsluRkI9IkXgfxHynoos ZGqCSqeeQH5oq9Rju7bVFPeX4CJmkOwCJRGlhrmogpAbGRroIN7rKRHlTcY3h659aS9U QXP80mZPJ1CqDB1L4bj6DeaQiMxdwcppjXEGMzykWCPHPQkOlX5zXvwDDjAXbv2tG953 BEsBGeFrAWFH5mH4XbmO9yt28bJLzmgoNDbD9eZbbxOa/ZymhUFn3J6QZhUMDo+6UVBC n2OxXBjQqnoKLGFJ7yoHPsFIsfQ+8/Gz82995l6dFmfHOTfjhQurdJiU1Tax/Cw1ktQe YgXQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AElRT7GGDars4YIRVDnqXptJGotbF8VcK8g/2Kf7yNJOEOs0YwcReiEp CVWKN/PEoqBVP+RJHZGVhhw7wAbiCSEDXYgJpFR+Uw== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AG47ELuiQsAtnDKhAa+h8nyKSseeVUXtDDnS90C2l149ZH/wZ32ZThcG2lMDn6uVFXwzDizo12ruE9Bn9SZvixKBiDU= X-Received: by 10.25.217.69 with SMTP id q66mr10749017lfg.62.1520265663093; Mon, 05 Mar 2018 08:01:03 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.46.112.3 with HTTP; Mon, 5 Mar 2018 08:01:02 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <20180301165059.GV50954@kduck.kaduk.org> References: <20180301162036.GR50954@kduck.kaduk.org> <20180301164422.GU50954@kduck.kaduk.org> <20180301165059.GV50954@kduck.kaduk.org> From: Nathaniel McCallum Date: Mon, 5 Mar 2018 11:01:02 -0500 Message-ID: To: Benjamin Kaduk Cc: kitten@ietf.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Archived-At: Subject: Re: [kitten] The future of the kitten WG X-BeenThere: kitten@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: Common Authentication Technologies - Next Generation List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 05 Mar 2018 16:01:07 -0000 On Thu, Mar 1, 2018 at 11:51 AM, Benjamin Kaduk wrote: > Realistically, if we were going through the normal WG document > process, we probably would not even get an IETF last call before > London, since there is a huge "bulge" of documents that are all > trying to go through at the moment. (The IESG had to defer several > documents and extend their IETF last call in order to actually give > the area directorate review teams and the community a reasonable > amount of time to actually comment on things.) I'm still looking > into the details of what exactly is possible, both technically and > by policy. > > That said, I am pretty confident that krb-spake-preauth will get > published as a Proposed Standard, and we are just worrying about the > details of how to get here. My concern is not just that we get there but also how long it takes us to get there. From nobody Mon Mar 5 08:04:17 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: kitten@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: kitten@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 68C9112D887 for ; Mon, 5 Mar 2018 08:04:16 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.001 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.001 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=mozilla.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id R9KNTdZYkKzh for ; Mon, 5 Mar 2018 08:04:15 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-io0-x243.google.com (mail-io0-x243.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c06::243]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 31D3E126D74 for ; Mon, 5 Mar 2018 08:04:15 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-io0-x243.google.com with SMTP id f1so18540945iob.0 for ; Mon, 05 Mar 2018 08:04:15 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=mozilla.com; s=google; h=subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:in-reply-to; bh=nAKBheCksBVFNuFHKd3xlUp72JJ0aMrUJ/PBWYKXM/w=; b=LVJiC+cxJN+hBVySQs2udz/oMrFOpyjXyng2C+fn4StqxIBo9m74xVSDcWZfYoI/bB 9Adp+02SEVvPU2c4EWxtxSh6xB4xfV3BvY92TxF7dUWYv0Q2MTenNAOySLpc6kqrcPvH rTtyi3m5FFDwfmCHb/eSkTz+DQnTkxHo6Yc3Y= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to; bh=nAKBheCksBVFNuFHKd3xlUp72JJ0aMrUJ/PBWYKXM/w=; b=D8CpT2Jb993SymkEtr0OEE+fOvtdG0O5zrOvoSfysJKXZMnqImLiOMjEDbCFpwR238 TtGPsakBvg6PDbnMgFczx1wCDqPw/I7SHMYZqkU+0n/1CI6XwuLCbAkcaUUrJzUkfmHc 05321kCDDjJTW0gKPSbmABgXsgFSJtVCxy/J4Z0Cv3EizNhCUWxDlLR36NfqMnbO4DRZ ylxeDwPmRpFDBNyGq/cEBIQd77E/1vzSfffgIfkrDqYrlzb5DTDaG7GOL+3uxL6lxl53 +d7PxhhqnI4Ctz/d3/n9Ak9lFF3Zg/c7SdnJbA9/YWukzvsnqHhxugi/+whaJsGEtJnN fZUg== X-Gm-Message-State: AElRT7EfHJIfHvHpfvR1lpdZnjxn5sDFsgWLfZ9rGPaGelO/7JYwktdH O84URE4fnxnfI8KDF30sh4mQk+tB4r0= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AG47ELuDz6zMv3uXCI8rzVoCpNjfCwphotnnIWPm/N0yx659rye8oWBOwuFdKBztxD5c+pQRBFXXAw== X-Received: by 10.107.150.210 with SMTP id y201mr17476948iod.162.1520265854448; Mon, 05 Mar 2018 08:04:14 -0800 (PST) Received: from dragon.local ([76.25.3.152]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id c13sm5064510itd.31.2018.03.05.08.04.13 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 05 Mar 2018 08:04:13 -0800 (PST) To: Nathaniel McCallum , Benjamin Kaduk Cc: kitten@ietf.org References: <20180301162036.GR50954@kduck.kaduk.org> <20180301164422.GU50954@kduck.kaduk.org> <20180301165059.GV50954@kduck.kaduk.org> From: Peter Saint-Andre Message-ID: <813839d3-21e1-7e5e-d2b8-bd11dce0986f@mozilla.com> Date: Mon, 5 Mar 2018 09:04:12 -0700 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.13; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="20abzcwxKn89I56vPhGiWP1b3c6ZOQxCh" Archived-At: Subject: Re: [kitten] The future of the kitten WG X-BeenThere: kitten@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: Common Authentication Technologies - Next Generation List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 05 Mar 2018 16:04:16 -0000 This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156) --20abzcwxKn89I56vPhGiWP1b3c6ZOQxCh Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="otNCeWi8Ncgl8KeWZJFUfAyYnVz1QMDDw"; protected-headers="v1" From: Peter Saint-Andre To: Nathaniel McCallum , Benjamin Kaduk Cc: kitten@ietf.org Message-ID: <813839d3-21e1-7e5e-d2b8-bd11dce0986f@mozilla.com> Subject: Re: [kitten] The future of the kitten WG References: <20180301162036.GR50954@kduck.kaduk.org> <20180301164422.GU50954@kduck.kaduk.org> <20180301165059.GV50954@kduck.kaduk.org> In-Reply-To: --otNCeWi8Ncgl8KeWZJFUfAyYnVz1QMDDw Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 3/5/18 9:01 AM, Nathaniel McCallum wrote: > On Thu, Mar 1, 2018 at 11:51 AM, Benjamin Kaduk wrote: >> Realistically, if we were going through the normal WG document >> process, we probably would not even get an IETF last call before >> London, since there is a huge "bulge" of documents that are all >> trying to go through at the moment. (The IESG had to defer several >> documents and extend their IETF last call in order to actually give >> the area directorate review teams and the community a reasonable >> amount of time to actually comment on things.) I'm still looking >> into the details of what exactly is possible, both technically and >> by policy. >> >> That said, I am pretty confident that krb-spake-preauth will get >> published as a Proposed Standard, and we are just worrying about the >> details of how to get here. >=20 > My concern is not just that we get there but also how long it takes us > to get there. It seems to me that the existence or non-existence of a WG isn't the problem, but the lack of energy. :-) If we push on through and get folks to review the relevant documents, we can get things done. Peter --otNCeWi8Ncgl8KeWZJFUfAyYnVz1QMDDw-- --20abzcwxKn89I56vPhGiWP1b3c6ZOQxCh Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIzBAEBCAAdFiEENVUj07j078lgnb70ZWGMGH9oFKkFAlqdanwACgkQZWGMGH9o FKn8/RAAqD6YIaQyiYj9OS1tazfrw7PmUxjOW+V+iSn499pdubQmZ7YBVb7O+G32 OA7c4v58l7NoLkMKE/vseaeILar9wAFgb40b7dgemMqc18gMUIE/wavGREnmszlH hfbFrzFryiyZLxV2H/BimUzbCxAFjKzUq4ymPUHRQSt6/FElgAp1rr2D/kDc0IvU 2zlp/Z0MIEZWLG0PDpWSMN22d1TbOnMIfJskrtnG174gYv509uhoXtV4BQ4tQTub DAwHQh5gqNzvyuSSd7GlMUtTrv8NAkOCZ1iKkF6NlRKvO1FqIYRqD7CJw0C9lBoC Vv2X7jZZJ92n6VAAw9+LpqmXYmrxaQKZGSALDuc04kaCz33jbo5ogvjOhvO25R6W DW8pAFW8ZF8PmxiQ9Hjd5CGficiPC/dojOqOS1U3sSkr5NyOqikUYROd56OSy1v5 iCcIE8+hzye4q/XF8j60O+7NWQiBmehifHnpYq3knLFhP+xePYWnQfbhoTcK4z/5 K8fJfehkSjshX0+/iilTHxFYN6aqMuVOXmgdyWtX4r7vh0pYGqgooVudvuhRHhgB mRe7PfQGYDURpfDRh/cHrd8YWicjQYJ+n5pxrpP1MLbNFB5Ynvj6FaDF1r/ciATV 9LqCUMtt/kGgVk6G+ZJdQJwnOkZzSK5YsGnJRGXmnz4EhUp7UIk= =q2Ak -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --20abzcwxKn89I56vPhGiWP1b3c6ZOQxCh-- From nobody Mon Mar 5 10:45:41 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: kitten@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: kitten@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9CDAE12DA4C for ; Mon, 5 Mar 2018 10:45:39 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.21 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.21 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id GvCOuLxgz37x for ; Mon, 5 Mar 2018 10:45:38 -0800 (PST) Received: from dmz-mailsec-scanner-2.mit.edu (dmz-mailsec-scanner-2.mit.edu [18.9.25.13]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2100F12DA43 for ; Mon, 5 Mar 2018 10:45:38 -0800 (PST) X-AuditID: 1209190d-453ff700000062f7-c3-5a9d9050d3c5 Received: from mailhub-auth-4.mit.edu ( [18.7.62.39]) (using TLS with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by dmz-mailsec-scanner-2.mit.edu (Symantec Messaging Gateway) with SMTP id EC.9C.25335.0509D9A5; Mon, 5 Mar 2018 13:45:37 -0500 (EST) Received: from outgoing.mit.edu (OUTGOING-AUTH-1.MIT.EDU [18.9.28.11]) by mailhub-auth-4.mit.edu (8.13.8/8.9.2) with ESMTP id w25IjXtm005459 for ; Mon, 5 Mar 2018 13:45:34 -0500 Received: from localhost (EQUAL-RITES.MIT.EDU [10.18.1.59]) (authenticated bits=0) (User authenticated as ghudson@ATHENA.MIT.EDU) by outgoing.mit.edu (8.13.8/8.12.4) with ESMTP id w25IjWBn010854 for ; Mon, 5 Mar 2018 13:45:32 -0500 From: Greg Hudson To: kitten@ietf.org Date: Mon, 05 Mar 2018 13:45:32 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFlrCIsWRmVeSWpSXmKPExsUixG6nrhs4YW6UwZV5PBZHN69icWD0WLLk J1MAYxSXTUpqTmZZapG+XQJXxs+fpxkLFjJVTHownbWB8TNjFyMnh4SAicTbD80sXYxcHEIC i5kktk5ZwgThHGOUWPi/gxWkSkignUni3nQjEJtNQFli/f6tLCC2iICwxO6t75hBbGEBN4nO 6V/BbBYBVYnXO3vBenkFDCWaP09mgbAFJU7OfAJmMwtISBx88YJ5AiP3LCSpWUhSCxiZVjHK puRW6eYmZuYUpybrFicn5uWlFuka6eVmluilppRuYgQFAack7w7Gf3e9DjEKcDAq8fByeM+N EmJNLCuuzD3EKMnBpCTKa5kIFOJLyk+pzEgszogvKs1JLT7EKMHBrCTCe70BKMebklhZlVqU D5OS5mBREud1N9GOEhJITyxJzU5NLUgtgsnKcHAoSfBe6wdqFCxKTU+tSMvMKUFIM3Fwggzn ARreAlLDW1yQmFucmQ6RP8WozdG28kkbM8eNF6/bmIVY8vLzUqXEeW1BSgVASjNK8+CmvWIU B3pKmDcMJMsDjHq4Oa+AVjABrTh/dw7IipJEhJRUA+NFb4HKafP3qUz6/On9xfJHvhsPbuao 3CXlv4ZP0/ZpxcfO5xK3w5/cLbi/PD6NgV8t0et6jL1odN+O1yuffFBrOxeuofRpjd1XpzVX 3ed58T42OfLev2Xn9q8OsUb3Sw1a/26RzZgqPlW8p3RFS7Ghh5p9iosGQ9Xujprl58UnfX+9 hbvytb0SS3FGoqEWc1FxIgDl3lvutwIAAA== Archived-At: Subject: [kitten] Intent to ship draft-ietf-kitten-spake-preauth-05 in MIT krb5 X-BeenThere: kitten@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: Common Authentication Technologies - Next Generation List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 05 Mar 2018 18:45:40 -0000 I intend to merge support for single-factor SPAKE preauth into the MIT krb5 master branch soon (likely after some small number of weeks to allow time for code review), to be shipped in release 1.17 later this year. https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-kitten-krb-spake-preauth-05