The Kerberos WG met on 3/17/3 for about 1 and a half hours. In 
attendance where approximately 53 people. 

Doug Engert the chairman open the meeting, and a scribe was selected.  But 
since the scribe's computer broke during the meeting, we don't have the 
official notes, so this this is a compilation of notes from others.  So if 
there is something missing, please get the comments to the list. 

Sam gave a presentation on the recent Kerberos 4 
vulnerabilities. Steve Bellovin wrote a paper on this subject in 1991 or 92, 
but was one paragraph short of describing the attack.

Cliff, and Ken talked on the three key drafts: Clarifications, KCRYPTO, and 
AES as they need to progress together to WG last call. 
Clarifications and AES are now ready for last call, KCRYPTO  needs some 
minor changes and should be ready in a few days.  Clarifications has 
already gone through a last call, so it expected to progress.  These three 
drafts need to progress together, and need to progress before many of the 
other drafts, including the Extensions draft. 

Wyllys talked on the major revision of the 
change-set-password draft, which is being positioned to work with 
Clarifications and Extensions. 

Jeff Altman, talked about the UTF-8 draft, and the SASL equivalent draft.  He 
will be looking at merging them, with help from the SASL chair. This 
should be a win-win situation for both WGs.
 

Sasha addressed Packet Cable issues: 
   - PacketCable (VoIP security) is using a frozen version of Kerberos 
revisions draft, before some features (e.g., keyed checksums) were 
removed for interoperability with RFC 1510.
   - When Kerberos extensions is defined with those features removed from 
clarifications, PacketCable may be able to at least optionally support an 
IETF RFC for Kerberos extensions.
   - PacketCable is also using latest versions of PKINIT and PKCROSS IETF 
drafts.
   - I didn't have any changes to report on the PKINIT draft; still have 
same issues to address on UTF8 string encoding and translation from X.500 
names to Kerberos principal names and realms.  Need to reference latest 
crypto and clarifications drafts.

I talked on the IAKERB  about how it had been before the IESG, for over a 
year, but there has been some concerns about it.  It has being 
withdrawn, and will be considered again if there is  substantial 
interest. It should be update with regards to Extensions.  (Since then I 
realize I should not have made this statement.  I and the AD have been in 
contact with the author on this, and it is expected the draft will be 
resubmitted.) 

Sam further commented: 

"I don't believe that iakerb is likely to have any issues with 
clarifications, but the mode of iakerb that has reduced number of round 
trips is likely to be incompatible with extensions because extensions will 
integrity-protect  the request to make sure no changes are made."

"I believe that one of iakerb, EAP krb5, , EAP GSS should actually go 
forward.  Eap krb5 has been sketched out (although not publicly) but does 
not really exist within the IETF context.  EAP GSS has significant 
security issues and I hope it does not go forward at all.  Iakerb has 
significant esthetic issues that we have discussed to death here.  I think we 
should wait until there is clear interest either from the wireless or 
dialup community that they want to use Kerberos and then work on one of 
these mechanisms."