Re: Document editors

Sam Hartman wrote:
> 
> Are there any parties who would be willing to edit the base spec and C
> bindings if we do manage to have a WG?
> 
> If we don't have document editors, a lot of the proposed work is not
> possible.

As Nico points out we should have the BOF first, and we need to invite
people who we feel should be interested even if they are not
interested today.  

I thing it would be important to have the WG members and editors who 
have dealt with multiple GSSAPI implementations. The extensions 
need to address the needs of more then just Kerberos.

We need to strive to provide the generic hooks so calls to mech specific
routines can be made via the GSSAPI and not be calling the underlying 
mechanisms routines directly. I believe that this is one of the traps a 
mechanism developer can fall into as they only have to deal with their
own mechanism, and this has lead to applications being tied to
specific mechs or even specific implementations of a mech. 
  

> 
> -++**==--++**==--++**==--++**==--++**==--++**==--++**==
> This message was posted through the Stanford campus mailing list
> server.  If you wish to unsubscribe from this mailing list, send the
> message body of "unsubscribe ietf-cat-wg" to [email protected]

-- 

 Douglas E. Engert  <[email protected]>
 Argonne National Laboratory
 9700 South Cass Avenue
 Argonne, Illinois  60439 
 (630) 252-5444
-++**==--++**==--++**==--++**==--++**==--++**==--++**==
This message was posted through the Stanford campus mailing list
server.  If you wish to unsubscribe from this mailing list, send the
message body of "unsubscribe ietf-cat-wg" to [email protected]