Subject: I-D Action:draft-ietf-kitten-gssapi-domain-based-names-04.txt

From: [email-masked]
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2007 03:00:02 -0500

A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories.
This draft is a work item of the Kitten (GSS-API Next Generation) Working Group of the IETF.

	Title           : GSS-API Internationalization and Domain-Based Service Names and Name Type
	Author(s)       : N. Williams
	Filename        : draft-ietf-kitten-gssapi-domain-based-names-04.txt
	Pages           : 13
	Date            : 2007-11-19

This document describes domainname-based service principal names and
the corresponding name type for the Generic Security Service
Application Programming Interface (GSS-API).  Internationalization of
the GSS-API is also covered.

Domain-based service names are similar to host-based service names,
but using a domain name (not necessarily an Internet domain name) in
addition to a hostname.  The primary purpose of domain-based names is
to provide a meyour local documentation on
	how to manipulate these messages.

Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader
implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the
Internet-Draft.
_______________________________________________
Kitten mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/kitten

---

From: Alexey Melnikov <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2007 17:55:55 +0000

>	Filename        : draft-ietf-kitten-gssapi-domain-based-names-04.txt
Nico, this version is much better and almost addresses IESG DISCUSSes 
from Ted Hardie (now owned by Chris Newman) and Jari Arkko.
However, you haven't added ABNF for <service>, <domain> and <hostname>. 
I would like to suggest the following:

     domain-based-name = service "@" domain "@" hostname
     hostname          = domain
     domain            = sub-domain 1*("." sub-domain)
     sub-domain        = Let-dig [Ldh-str]
     Let-dig           = ALPHA / DIGIT
     Ldh-str           = *( ALPHA / DIGIT / "-" ) Let-dig

Some notes

1). I thought about using the "host" definition from RFC 3986, but 
decided against it, as RFC 3986's definition is too permissive. My 
suggestion above was extracted from an email RFC, but you probably don't 
want to reference it.

2). <service> is not defined above. RFC 2743 can be used, however it 
doesn't define any ABNF for it. Another possibility is to use <scheme> 
from RFC 3986:

  scheme        = ALPHA *( ALPHA / DIGIT / "+" / "-" / "." )

unless you want underscores, etc.

=============
Other issues from IESG that you should address:

Ted Hardie wrote:

The document has RFC 4033 as a normative reference, but the single citation
appears to be informative.

Jari Arkko wrote:

The examples in both documents use the example.tld domain
name which is NOT listed as a legal, reserved name
in RFC 2606. (Even if it happens to be used in RFC 3375.)

=============
Other minor comments/nits:

[I-D.ietf-sasl-gssapi] - this is RFC 4752 now.

Also check IDnits: 
<http://tools.ietf.org/wg/kitten/draft-ietf-kitten-gssapi-domain-based-names/draft-ietf-kitten-gssapi-domain-based-names-04.nits.txt>
In particular it says that IANA Considerations section is missing, but 
your draft is asking IANA to assign new OIDs.