Hi.
The Unicode/ SASLprep discussion in a different thread
notwithstanding, I favor approval of this document.
However, as an editorial matter, Appendix A points to two
expired I-Ds, draft-ietf-sasl-digest-to-historic and
draft-ietf-sasl-crammd5-to-historic. Expired I-Ds are
notoriously hard to find, especially since the practice of the
RFC Editor has been to delete the file names, treating them as
"works in progress" even though there is no expectation of
further progress.
I would encourage the WG to review this appendix and decide
whether those references are actually useful. If they are not,
they should be removed. If they are, it seems to me to be
worthwhile to pull the explanatory / "list of problems" material
out of those I-Ds and publish an Informational document that
might be titled "Issues with Some Older SASL Mechanisms" (or
words to that effect) so that it could be referenced usefully.
john
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf