Clarifications and Extensions to the Generic Security Service Application Program Interface (GSS-API) for the Use of Channel Bindings
Note: This ballot was opened for revision 06 and is now closed.
( Tim Polk ) Yes
( Ron Bonica ) No Objection
( Ross Callon ) No Objection
( Lisa Dusseault ) No Objection
( Lars Eggert ) (was Discuss) No Objection
( Pasi Eronen ) No Objection
( Adrian Farrel ) No Objection
( Russ Housley ) No Objection
Comment (2009-04-06 for -)
Based on the response from the author to Brian Carpenter's Gen-ART Review, I was expecting this paragraph to be revised: > > Where a language binding of the GSS-API models channel bindings as > OCTET STRINGs (or the language's equivalent), then the implementation > MUST assume that the given bindings correspond only to the > application-data field of GSS-CHANNEL-BINDINGS as shown above, rather > than some encoding of GSS-CHANNEL-BINDINGS. > The expected update would be something like this: > > Where the language binding of the GSS-API model's channel bindings is > a single OCTET STRING (or the language's equivalent), then the > implementation SHOULD assume that the given bindings correspond only > to the application-data field of GSS-CHANNEL-BINDINGS shown above.
( Cullen Jennings ) No Objection
Support Lars discuss
( Robert Sparks ) No Objection
( Magnus Westerlund ) No Objection
( Alexey Melnikov ) Recuse
Comment (2009-03-26 for -)
I was a WG chair for Kitten at the time of the publication request and were involved in discussions about it.