Subject: Re: Text (Re: Proposed updates for domain-based drafts)

From: Alexey Melnikov <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 05 Sep 2006 12:39:10 +0100

Nicolas Williams wrote:

>    A domain-based name consists of three required elements:
> 
>    o  a service name
> 
>    o  a domain name
> 
>    o  a hostname
> 
>+   For the purposes of domain-based names a "domain" is defined by the
>+   applications that use domain-based names.  An application protocol
>+   might use a simple DNS domainname, such as "example.com" for naming,
>+   while another it might use the DNS domainname of the SRV RRs it
>+   queries (e.g., "_tcp._foo.example.com"), and yet another may use
>+   something that does not resemble a DNS domainname.  Application
>+   protocol specifications that provide for use of domain-based service
>+   names MUST define the domain-portion of their domain-based names.
>  
>
I like the suggested changes, except for the last sentence quoted above. 
Here you are trying to put requirements on application protocols, which 
is probably Ok. But you are effectively declaring all existing 
application layer protocols non compliant with this MUST. Was this the 
intent?

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

---

From: Jeffrey Altman <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 05 Sep 2006 09:10:59 -0400

> application layer protocols non compliant with this MUST. Was this the

The way I read this is that the MUST does not apply to existing
application protocols because they do not "provide for the use of
domain-based service names".  Only new application protocols that
specify the use of domain-based service names will need to define what a
"domain" is for that application.

Jeffrey Altman

---

From: Nicolas Williams <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 5 Sep 2006 08:24:43 -0500

> application layer protocols non compliant with this MUST. Was this the 

Not at all -- existing apps don't know how to use domain-based names, so
they will require updating anyways.  This is a requirement only for
applications that wish to support the use of domain-based names.

Nico
--

---

From: Jeffrey Hutzelman <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 05 Sep 2006 15:00:23 -0400

On Tuesday, September 05, 2006 08:24:43 AM -0500 Nicolas Williams 
<[email-masked]> wrote:

>> > +   might use a simple DNS domainname, such as "example.com" for
>> > naming, +   while another it might use the DNS domainname of the SRV
>> > RRs it +   queries (e.g., "_tcp._foo.example.com"), and yet another
>> > may use +   something that does not resemble a DNS domainname.
>> > Application +   protocol specifications that provide for use of
>> > domain-based service +   names MUST define the domain-portion of their
>> > domain-based names.
>> >
>> >

Right.  Just as an application which uses host-based service names needs to 
specify a service name, and application which uses domain-based names needs 
to specify both a service name and how to derive the "domain" component.

-- Jeff

---

From: Nicolas Williams <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 5 Sep 2006 15:02:49 -0500

> applications that wish to support the use of domain-based names.

Also, if your concern is about DIGEST-MD5 applications that use
serv-name then worry not: these drafts are specifically for GSS-API
applications, and clearly no SASL/GS1 applications have used
domain-based names in the past.

OT:  Now, about DIGEST-MD5's support for domain-based naming...  Are
there SASL applications that use this?  Does Cyrus SASL implement this?
Any other implementations?  Please answer off-list, or at least off the
KITTEN list, as this would be off-topic there.