- From: Kurt D. Zeilenga <Kurt@OpenLDAP.org>
- Date: Tue, 05 Nov 2002 09:49:46 -0800
- To: Patrik Fältström <paf@cisco.com>
- Cc: discuss@apps.ietf.org, Timur Shemsedinov <Timur@niist.ntu-kpi.kiev.ua>
First, I like to note that Informational appears to a reasonable track for this document. It basically documents an existing approach. Security Considerations It should be clearly noted that protocol provides only a simple clear-text user/password authentication mechanism. It is also noted that the protocol does not provide any mechanism to establish data integrity and/or data confidentiality services. As such, I believe some statement of limited applicability would be appropriate. IANA Considerations The document does not request the registration the URI scheme it details. Also, the document does not establish any IANA registries but appears to have a number of extensible fields. Also, the Section 1 sentence I am distinctly aware of all complexities connected with USP implementation, but standardization always brings more benefits, than problems. implies that this document USP is being standardized. It's not. I suggest replacing the word "standardization" with "formalization". Lastly, in doing a quick review the document, I noticed a number of editorial issues and the usual nits. These I will raise to the author separately (with CC to the Patrik) when I get a chance. Kurt At 08:10 PM 1969-12-31, Patrik Fältström wrote: >I have as Area Director got a request to publish the named I-D as Informational RFC. I hereby would like to get input from the Applications Area on the document. > > Regards, Patrik
Received on Tuesday, 5 November 2002 12:51:29 UTC