Subject: [kitten] Fwd: [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC2743 (3797)

From: Stephen Farrell <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 12 Nov 2013 22:30:38 +0000

FYI, comments welcome, if any. I assume this should
be approved.

S

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC2743 (3797)
Date: Tue, 12 Nov 2013 12:31:18 -0800 (PST)
From: RFC Errata System <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked], [email-masked], [email-masked]
CC: [email-masked], [email-masked]

The following errata report has been submitted for RFC2743,
"Generic Security Service Application Program Interface Version 2,
Update 1".

--------------------------------------
You may review the report below and at:
http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?rfc=2743&eid=3797

--------------------------------------
Type: Editorial
Reported by: Benjamin Kaduk <[email-masked]>

Section: 2.4.5

Original Text
-------------
   Outputs:

   o  major_status INTEGER,

   o  minor_status INTEGER,

   o  output_name INTERNAL NAME  -- caller must release with
   -- GSS_Release_name()

   Return major_status codes:

   o  GSS_S_COMPLETE indicates that a valid name representation is
   output in output_name and described by the type value in
   output_name_type.

Corrected Text
--------------
   Outputs:

   o  major_status INTEGER,

   o  minor_status INTEGER,

   o  output_name INTERNAL NAME  -- caller must release with
   -- GSS_Release_name()

   Return major_status codes:

   o  GSS_S_COMPLETE indicates that a valid name representation is
   output in output_name.

Notes
-----
The description of the GSS_S_COMPLETE return value from
GSS_Import_name() indicates that the contents of the output_name field
are "described by the type value in output_name_type".  There is no such
output_name_type parameter.

Instructions:
-------------
This errata is currently posted as "Reported". If necessary, please
use "Reply All" to discuss whether it should be verified or
rejected. When a decision is reached, the verifying party (IESG)
can log in to change the status and edit the report, if necessary.

--------------------------------------
RFC2743 (draft-ietf-cat-rfc2078bis-08)
--------------------------------------
Title               : Generic Security Service Application Program
Interface Version 2, Update 1
Publication Date    : January 2000
Author(s)           : J. Linn
Category            : PROPOSED STANDARD
Source              : Common Authentication Technology
Area                : Security
Stream              : IETF
Verifying Party     : IESG

---

From: Benjamin Kaduk <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 12 Nov 2013 17:34:27 -0500 (EST)

The bogus text appears to be there from square 1 
(draft-ietf-cat-genericsec-00), for what it's worth.

-Ben

On Tue, 12 Nov 2013, Stephen Farrell wrote:

> _______________________________________________
> Kitten mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/kitten
>

---

From: [email-masked] (Martin Rex)
Date: Wed, 13 Nov 2013 00:51:53 +0100 (CET)

> Section: 2.4.5  GSS_Import_name
>
>  [compressed summary of the change]
>
> -    o  GSS_S_COMPLETE indicates that a valid name representation is
> -    output in output_name and described by the type value in
> -    output_name_type.
>
> +    o  GSS_S_COMPLETE indicates that a valid name representation is
> +    output in output_name.

I agree that the reference to the non-existing parameter output_name_type
is a defect in the description for the GSS_S_COMPLETE result of
GSS_Import_name.

I'm slighlty confused by the expression "valid name representation is output".
Admittedly, the descriptions of GSS_S_COMPLETE for the two calls
GSS_Inquire_cred and GSS_Inquire_cred_by_mech also employ "represents":
"the output cred_name .. represents .. the credentials's associated principal
name"
whereas other calls (GSS_Accept_sec_context, GSS_Inquire_context,
GSS_Canonicalize_name, GSS_Duplicate_name) use expressions like
"returns src_name", "src_name is valid" or
"returns another reference (dest_name)" 

How about:

   o  GSS_S_COMPLETE indicates that input_name_string was converted
   to an internal name and returned as output_name

-Martin

---

From: Benjamin Kaduk <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 13 Nov 2013 11:59:16 -0500 (EST)

> "returns another reference (dest_name)"

Phrasing like "valid [type] representation is available" is also used for 
GSS_S_COMPLETE returns from GSS_Display_status, GSS_Display_name, and 
GSS_Export_name.  Admittedly, "available" and "output" are not the same 
word, but there seems to be some precedent in the document for the use of 
"representation" in this situation.

>   to an internal name and returned as output_name

I agree that this is a valid description of what a successful 
GSS_Import_name call should do, and I do prefer this style of writing.

However, I don't know that the errata process is the right place for us to 
be enforcing our current ideas of writing style on a document that has 
already been edited and published.  We seem to have found evidence that 
the writing style of RFC 2743 is internally inconsistent, so my preference 
is to stick with my original proposal, the smallest change to bring about 
correctness, which is internally consistent with at least some of the 
document's existing style.

-Ben