Subject: RE: Proposed charter and milestone revision for CAT-WG

From: "Linn, John" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 17 May 1999 16:10:31 -0400

Thanks to Frank and Sam for their comments re authorization.  I'd like to
encourage others to comment on this topic, and more broadly also to review
and comment on the somewhat revised draft which I'm attaching here for
proposed charter and milestones.  From a procedural perspective, I'd like to
get this to the IESG shortly, accurately reflecting group priorities and
concerns.

Description of Working Group:

The goal of the Common Authentication Technology (CAT) Working Group is to
provide distributed security services (which have included authentication,
integrity, and confidentiality, and may broaden to include authorization) to
a variety of protocol callers in a manner which insulates those callers from
the specifics of underlying security mechanisms.

By separating security implementation tasks from the tasks of integrating
security data elements into caller protocols, those tasks can be partitioned
and performed separately by implementors with different areas of expertise.
This provides leverage for the IETF community's security-oriented resources,
and allows protocol implementors to focus on the functions their protocols
are designed to provide rather than on characteristics of security
mechanisms. CAT seeks to encourage uniformity and modularity in security
approaches, supporting the use of common techniques and accommodating
evolution of underlying technologies.

In support of these goals, the working group pursues several interrelated
tasks. We have defined a common service interface (GSS-API) allowing callers
to invoke security services in association-oriented environments, with an
associated token format identifying the security mechanism being employed.
Existing documents provide C language bindings for GSS-API; currently
ongoing work is defining bindings for Java.  Authorization interfaces are
currently being evaluated as a related area for follow-on work, with the
level of achievable portability an important consideration. The CAT Working
Group also defines supporting mechanisms to provide security services;
current activity includes specification of "low-infrastructure" mechanisms
to support ease of deployment and use.  

Goals and Milestones:

Done: Submit GSS-V2, Update 1 base specification and C bindings to IESG for
consideration as new Proposed Standards to obsolete RFCs 1509 and 2078.

Jul 99: Determine direction and intent re progressing authorization
interfaces. 

Jul 99: Determine direction and intent re progressing low-infrastructure
mechanism definitions. 

Aug 99: Submit GSS-V2 Java bindings specification to IESG for consideration
as Proposed Standard.

Aug 99: Submit Kerberos Public-Key Initial Authentication (PKINIT) document
to IESG for consideration as Proposed Standard.

Aug 99: Submit revision to Kerberos protocol specification to IESG as new
Proposed Standard to succeed RFC-1510.

Sep 99: Submit GSS-V2 Java service provider interface document to IESG for
consideration as Proposed Standard. 

Nov 99: Review status of ongoing active projects. 

--jl
==========================================================================
This message was posted through the Stanford campus mailing list
server.  If you wish to unsubscribe from this mailing list, send the
message body of "unsubscribe ietf-cat-wg" to [email-masked]

---

From: Denis Pinkas <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 19 May 1999 17:42:22 +0200

John,

I think that the terms you drafted are correct, i.e. "Authorization interfaces
are currently being evaluated as a related area for follow-on work, with the
level of achievable portability an important consideration.". You have for the
moment not included any deliverable. This is wise.

I am aware of three (at the moment) uncoordinated efforts to specify
authorization APIs. I hope that we will be able to join these efforts together
in a common draft. I have aleady attempted some steps in that direction, without
much success yet. :-( However I do not desesperate yet. :-)

The Oslo meeting and/or side discussions will hopefully help to make some
progress in this area.

Denis