[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: draft-morgan-pam-01.txt



Craig R.P. Heath wrote:
> they don't seem to be part of the current Linux PAM implementation?

They are pretty close to a client library that is part of the more
recent Linux-PAM tar balls.

> The draft claims to be associated with the "PAM working group" -

That's just a label for this email-list.

> I assume this is not an IETF working group, as I can find no
> reference to it on the IETF web site?
>
> My specific questions are:
> 
> - Why was this draft put forward to the IETF?

No, its not an IETF group's draft, but I was making use of the
internet-draft rules as described in the draft upload instructions...

> - Has it been discussed in any of the IETF working groups?

I don't believe so, although there is periodic discussion of PAM. I
believe the ssh groups are the most recent ones.

> - Is it based on some existing implementation or statement
>   of requirements?

Its an attempt to document where Linux-PAM is going and address the fact
that the XSSO document (attempt of X/Open-Opengroup to generalize PAM)
is pretty poorly written and according to the last time I was able to
talk with Vipin, going nowhere. I felt is was important to evolve PAM in
some way more in keeping with the original PAM RFC from Sun.

> - Will it be renewed now it has expired?

Yes. I've already had one prompt.. I hope to get my notes together after
the Linux World conference is over (its happening this week).

Hope that helps.

Cheers

Andrew



[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index] []