Subject: Interim IETF KRB-WG meeting

From: "Douglas E. Engert" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 08 Feb 2002 09:15:54 -0600

The interim meeting is on for next week. 

The focus of the meeting will be the revisions, with the first
item of business will be what needs to be in the revisions, and what
need to be in separate documents. We will then go on to work on 
the revisions.

On a lighter note, many of us will be arriving on Monday, so if 
anyone is interested in dinner, I propose that they meet in the hotel
lobby at 6:30p. 

-----

The Kerberos WG of the IETF will be holding a two day meeting to work on 
the Kerberos revisions draft. This is intended to be a working meeting
where the attendees will work on the details of the revisions document,
and any documents which closely relate to the revisions. 

(This announcement is being made per RFC 2026 Section 8. The meeting was 
also discussed at IETF-52, at both krb-wg and saag sessions.) 

When:   February 12-13 9:00AM-5:00PM 

Where:  Building W92 2nd floor South Station conference room 
        MIT
        304 Vassar St
        Cambridge, MA

What: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-cat-kerberos-revisions-10.txt

The Hyatt Regency at 575 Memorial Drive 617-492-1234, has rooms available
for $189 per night if you tell them you're coming for a conference at MIT.
The hotel is right across the street from building W92.  (Despite
the street addresses, both have their entrances on Amesbury St that
runs between them.  Walk out the hotel entrance, and W92 is across the
street and to the left.)

MIT has kindly agreed to provide a continental breakfast, and lunch,
so we will start refreshments at 8:00. 

I have heard from about 10 of the WG members who said they could come.
If you are comings, please let me know. 

-- 

 Douglas E. Engert  <[email-masked]>
 Argonne National Laboratory
 9700 South Cass Avenue
 Argonne, Illinois  60439 
 (630) 252-5444

---

From: Sam Hartman <[email-masked]>
Date: 08 Feb 2002 14:27:51 -0500

Doug, John brought up an interesting point in a discussion with us
last week.  It's fairly important that we produce a spec that is
acceptable to vendors: we want to make sure that vendors can justify
implementing our changes.

John has some ideas on how to accomplish this.  I think that it would
be worth a some of our time to discuss these issues.  

Also, I'll have a short presentation prepared on the open issues list.
If you have an issue with the extensibility proposal that has not been properly addressed and it isn't on
the   list I sent out in December, please let me know.

I know about several issues that Microsoft presented in SLC and in
mail since then.

Jeff Altman is arriving Sunday.  We hope to have something intelligent
to say about UTF-8 by Tuesday.

I also continue to work on coming up with proposed patches to the
draft to integrate parts of the extensibility proposal that appear to
have general agreement.  The actual ASN.1 still has several open
issues, as do a few details.  But I think the basic framework is
getting to a point where at least looking at how it fits into the
draft would be worth our time.

--Sam