Subject: [SECMECH] Approach to GUAM work

From: "Salowey, Joe" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 22 Aug 2005 17:15:40 -0700

We have had some discussion of two different approaches on the list
(framework bindings and bridge methods).  I think discussion is leaning
towards framework bindings as a good basic approach, realizing this
could be augmented by bridge mechanism and other tools for achieving
bindings. 

Here is a proposal for moving forward with this:

1. Document the requirements for creating mechanisms that can be bound
to any (GSS-API, SASL, EAP) framework
2. Identify tools such as mechanisms bridges that can help facilitate
the binding.  This could include a GSS-API EAP mechanism, pointers to
existing security layers that could be used (ESP, GSS-KRB,...),
automatic numbering and naming conventions, perhaps a GSS-API to AAA/EAP
bridge, tunneling...
3. Document any new tools (some may already exist) and document a
template for specifying a GUAM mechanism.  The template document would
provide the pointers to tools. 

Is this a reasonable approach?  
Who is willing to author/contribute to 1, 2 and 3?  
Who is willing to review documents from 1 and 3 (I'm not sure that 1
will be published as an RFC, but the requirements definitely need to be
reviewed)?

Thanks,

Joe

_______________________________________________
SECMECH mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/secmech