[00:33:00] --- dev-zero@jabber.org has become available [00:33:31] --- dev-zero@jabber.org has left [00:33:34] --- dev-zero@jabber.org has become available [00:48:06] --- abo has left [02:35:50] --- kaj has become available [02:44:30] --- jaltman has left: Replaced by new connection [02:44:31] --- jaltman has become available [02:44:42] --- Jeffrey Altman has become available [05:12:49] --- meffie has become available [06:01:10] --- jaltman has left: Disconnected [06:01:33] --- jaltman has become available [07:06:55] --- steven.jenkins has become available [07:15:27] quick procedure question: Tom keiser's post of http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-tkeiser-afs3-volser-tlv-00.txt in November did not result in any discussion. Is doing a Second Call for comments the appropriate next step, or is doing a Last Call the right thing? [07:16:05] Do you/Tom believe that the document is ready? [07:16:34] I think it's a good document, but no one gave any feedback at all. [07:16:46] I'm rather hesitant to do Last Call by Fiat. [07:18:26] Yeh. So, I guess the questions is what are you last calling for? [07:18:35] Is it a last call before you write code? [07:18:47] Or a last call before you consider the document published? [07:18:49] last call before the standard is set [07:18:52] the latter. [07:19:33] I think that's harder. Given there have been no comments at all, you could consider that it's something that folk aren't interested in, and that we shouldn't be standardising on. [07:19:39] Now, I don't believe that that is the case. [07:20:00] And I know others have been having similar comments. [07:20:06] s/comments/problems with comments/ [07:20:17] right. I don't think that's the case either. I suspect it's more of 'it's big and complicated; I'll look at it SomeTime' and SomeTime has not yet occurred. [07:20:47] Yeah. What might be worth trying is reposting a pointer to the document, and asking for expressions of interest. [07:21:02] right. that's what I was considering a Second Call. [07:21:29] And then going and actively soliciting those expressions. There are people like Christof who almost certainly needs the volume TLV stuff, who it might be useful to prod. [07:21:42] good point. [07:22:12] another procedural question (going back to your 'writing code' question): when is it customary to publish the code that implements the spec? [07:22:22] ie, do we need it before Last Call [07:22:31] I think you can publish the code at any point you like. [07:22:38] err, do we need it in Gerritt before Last Call [07:22:51] Obviously, it's bad manners to say "here's the code, so the spec can't change" [07:23:06] * steven.jenkins nods. which is one reason we haven't put a patch out there.. [07:23:08] But I think examples of running code can be useful at all stages of the process. [07:23:31] Obviously, there are issues with things like protocol constants which need to be thought through. [07:23:54] * steven.jenkins nods. there are several Registrar-impacting parts of the doc. [07:24:32] I'll re-post and poke various people (e.g., christof and the registrars) [07:24:45] others, of course, are free to weigh in. [07:26:09] tx for your suggestions [07:26:25] getting comments is like pulling teeth [07:26:26] I should actually read the document myself ... [07:27:15] yeah, i have it up in a tab and have for several firefox crashes. you'd think i'd take the hint [07:28:14] --- deason has become available [07:28:17] --- reuteras has left [07:30:03] --- reuteras has become available [07:57:21] --- reuteras has left [08:11:22] As a continuance to my Heimdal->AD cross-realm question from yesterday (sorry, I had to bail), it looks like I'm getting des3-cbc-sha1 enc'd cross-realm tickets from our Heimdal KDCs (tgt is des-cbc-crc). [08:12:02] That's from klist -v, btw. [08:24:15] Kevin: That means that you have more enctypes configured for your krbtgt/AD-REALM@HEIMDAL-REALM service principal. You want to only have rc4-hmac in Heimdal and you want to use KSETUP to configure AD to only use rc4 as the cross realm key type. [08:28:56] Alrighty then. I'll flog the Windows and IDMgmt people. Thanks guys. [08:32:56] > Given there have been no comments at all, you could consider that... Or just that no one noticed you published a draft. Did you actually ask for input on the list? You could ask again. [08:33:12] he did, and he did again, an hour ago [08:34:23] (or rather, tom did awhile ago; steven just did today) [08:35:03] > do we need it in Gerritt before Last Call No. You don't need to have support in a particular implementation before the standardization group adopts the spec. However, you may find that attempting to implement gives you insight into problems in the spec. [08:36:30] Windows doesn't implement des3-cbc-sha1, which would be your problem. [08:40:23] --- sxw mobile has become available [08:48:41] --- sxw mobile has left [08:55:46] --- Russ has become available [09:11:26] --- kaj has left [09:28:19] --- sxw mobile has become available [09:55:43] --- jaltman has left: Replaced by new connection [09:55:44] --- jaltman has become available [10:07:07] --- jaltman has left: Replaced by new connection [10:07:08] --- jaltman has become available [10:46:16] --- Russ has left: Replaced by new connection [10:46:17] --- Russ has become available [10:55:02] --- sxw mobile has left [12:38:23] --- dev-zero@jabber.org has left [12:46:22] --- Russ has left: Disconnected [13:21:19] --- Russ has become available [14:02:15] --- Kevin Sumner has left [14:35:46] --- sxw mobile has become available [15:08:27] --- meffie has left [15:19:50] --- sxw mobile has left [15:40:33] --- deason has left [15:52:59] --- sxw mobile has become available [20:06:54] --- mho has left [21:54:07] --- deason has become available [22:03:29] --- kaj has become available [22:17:28] --- reuteras has become available [22:24:25] --- deason has left [23:10:51] --- kaj has left [23:40:22] --- dev-zero@jabber.org has become available [23:40:40] --- dev-zero@jabber.org has left [23:40:59] --- dev-zero@jabber.org has become available