![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Philip Guenther wrote:
On Wed, 24 Jan 2007, The IESG wrote:
The IESG has received a request from an individual submitter to consider the following document:
- 'POP3 SASL Authentication Mechanism ' <draft-siemborski-rfc1734bis-10.txt> as a Proposed Standard
My apologies to the authors for not commenting on this document earlier.
Both this document and the related draft-siemborski-rfc2554bis discuss how the client can cancel an authentication exchange by sending a line with a single "*", but then fail to permit that in the ABNF of what the client sends.
Hi Philip, Good catch.
The 'auth-resp' production might have been part of an attempt to permit that, but it's not referenced or explained. I therefore suggest dropping the dangling 'auth-resp' line and changing this production:
auth-command = "AUTH" SP sasl-mech [SP (base64 / "=")] *(CRLF [base64]) CRLF
to something like
auth-command = "AUTH" SP sasl-mech [SP (base64 / "=")] *(CRLF [base64]) [ CRLF "*" ] CRLF
or better: it should be consistent with the other document, draft-siemborski-rfc2554bis, and have a production for the initial response. One for the cancel response would clarify the usage:
auth-command = "AUTH" SP sasl-mech [SP initial-response] *(CRLF [base64]) [CRLF cancel-response] CRLF
initial-response= base64 / "="
cancel-response = "*"
A similar change should be made to the rfc2554bis draft.
I've done this change to my copy of rfc2554bis. Thanks!
Otherwise, I support the advancement of this document. It's definitely an improvement over the existing scattering of documents.
_______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf at ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
Note Well: Messages sent to this mailing list are the opinions of the senders and do not imply endorsement by the IETF.