Subject: Re: result code for a deleted identity on a connection

From: Hallvard B Furuseth <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 2 May 2003 22:59:21 +0200

Kurt D. Zeilenga writes:
>> We should probably have a result code like invalidIdentity which is
>> sent back with a notice of disconnection (section 4.4.1 protocol draft)
>> followed by a closing of the connection by the server.
> 
> RFC 2251, 4.4.1:
>>   - strongAuthRequired: The server has detected that an established
>>     underlying security association protecting communication between
>>     the client and server has unexpectedly failed or been compromised.
> 
> I think it would be reasonable to return this in this case as well.

Why ask for _strong_ auth, and not just auth?

-- 
Hallvard

---

From: "Kurt D. Zeilenga" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 02 May 2003 15:38:01 -0700

First, we've clarified the result code, in general, to mean:
>        strongAuthRequired (8)
>           Except when returned in a Notice of Disconnect (see section 
>           4.4.1), this indicates that the server requires the client to
>           authentication using a strong(er) mechanism.

But I'm thinking RFC 2251, 4.4.1 should be clarified as well:
        - strongAuthRequired: The server has detected that an establish
          security association between the client and server has
          unexpectedly failed or been compromised, or that the
          server now requires the client to authenticate using a
          strong(er) mechanism.

That is, generalized the result code here as well.  I also
think other codes should be allowed in the Notice.  I think
it reasonable for implementations to return a variety of
other codes including busy, other, adminLimitExceeded,
unwillingToPerform, and confidentialityRequired.

Kurt