🚀 go-pugleaf

I thought I'd make a quick reply to the item on ANSI's draft response
to the NWI proposal for an Authentication Exchange ASE. I am not quite sure
that this newsgroup is an appropriate forum for discussion of ANSI draft
responses to NWI proposals however. SC21 is a political animal, and you might
want to consider the benefits of distributing U.S. draft text internationally,
where everyone can look at it in advance of official circulation.

In article <9002261922.AA00211@polka.mitre.org> gomberg@GATEWAY.MITRE.ORG writes:
<the work should consider>
>
>	2.  The Kerberos authentication mechanism distributed by MIT Project
>	    Athena.
>

I don't know anything about Kerberos. In particular, I don't how widely
accepted in the international community Kerberos is, or the implications of
the proposal that this mechanism must be considered for the NWI to be 
accepted. 

I do have an idea about what would happen to the standards process if every 
country involved voted NO to everything that didn't specifically consider 
nationally developed related material.

>
>
>	1.  Should the scope of work be broadened to "Security ASE" to include
>	    other security mechanisms for other services such as access control?
>	

CCITT Q19/VII (DAF) has submitted a liaison statement to JTC1/SC21/WG6 
proposing collaborative work on a Security Exchange Service Element. Is this
what the above is referring to? If so, maybe you want to reference the liaison
statement (JTC1/SC21/N3991). It is my understanding that this was proposed
earlier by CCITT and that N3991 is the second go, but I am not sure.

By the way, I believe Canada will be submitting a contribution stating that
the scope of the proposed NWI should be expanded to cover the specification
of a generic security-exchange ASE, which would provide a standard means of
transporting security exchange information in application-contexts where
no other ASE provides for this transport.