|
1.
|
Clear description of the referenced document:
|
|
|
|
Name:
|
IETF RFC 1510 (1993)
|
|
Title:
|
The Kerberos Network Authentication Service (V5), IETF RFC, September 1999.
|
|
|
2.
|
Status of approval:
|
|
|
The referred RFCs were approved by IESG (Internet Engineering Steering Group).
|
|
3.
|
Justification for the specific reference:
|
|
|
Draft Rec. X.cso refers to The Kerberos Network Authentication Service (V5), IETF RFC, September 1999.
|
|
4.
|
Current information, if any, about IPR issues:
|
|
|
Information on IPR issues regarding RFCs is available at: https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/search/. Specifically: https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/search/?option=rfc_search&rfc_search=1510
|
|
5.
|
Other useful information describing the "Quality" of the document:
|
|
|
Proposed Standard
|
|
6.
|
The degree of stability or maturity of the document:
|
|
|
Proposed Standard
|
|
7.
|
Relationship with other existing or emerging documents:
|
|
|
References within the referenced RFCs are listed under item (8).
|
|
8.
|
Any explicit references within that referenced document should also be listed:
|
|
|
[1] Miller, S., Neuman, C., Schiller, J., and J. Saltzer, "Section/
E.2.1: Kerberos Authentication and Authorization System",/
M.I.T. Project Athena, Cambridge, Massachusetts, December 21,/
1987./
/
[2] Steiner, J., Neuman, C., and J. Schiller, "Kerberos: An/
Authentication Service for Open Network Systems", pp. 191-202 in/
Usenix Conference Proceedings, Dallas, Texas, February, 1988./
/
[3] Needham, R., and M. Schroeder, "Using Encryption for/
Authentication in Large Networks of Computers", Communications/
of the ACM, Vol. 21 (12), pp. 993-999, December 1978./
/
[4] Denning, D., and G. Sacco, "Time stamps in Key Distribution/
Protocols", Communications of the ACM, Vol. 24 (8), pp. 533-536,/
August 1981./
/
[5] Kohl, J., Neuman, C., and T. Ts'o, "The Evolution of the/
Kerberos Authentication Service", in an IEEE Computer Society/
Text soon to be published, June 1992./
/
[6] Davis, D., and R. Swick, "Workstation Services and Kerberos/
Authentication at Project Athena", Technical Memorandum TM-424,/
MIT Laboratory for Computer Science, February 1990./
/
[7] Levine, P., Gretzinger, M, Diaz, J., Sommerfeld, W., and K./
Raeburn, "Section E.1: Service Management System, M.I.T./
Project Athena, Cambridge, Mas sachusetts (1987)./
/
[8] CCITT, Recommendation X.509: The Directory Authentication/
Framework, December 1988./
/
[9] Neuman, C., "Proxy-Based Authorization and Accounting for/
Distributed Systems," in Proceedings of the 13th International/
Conference on Distributed Computing Systems", Pittsburgh, PA,/
May 1993./
/
[10] Pato, J., "Using Pre-Authentication to Avoid Password Guessing/
Attacks", Open Software Foundation DCE Request for Comments 26,/
December 1992./
/
[11] National Bureau of Standards, U.S. Department of Commerce, "Data/
Encryption Standard", Federal Information Processing Standards/
Publication 46, Washington, DC (1977)./
[12] National Bureau of Standards, U.S. Department of Commerce, "DES/
Modes of Operation", Federal Information Processing Standards/
Publication 81, Springfield, VA, December 1980./
/
[13] Stubblebine S., and V. Gligor, "On Message Integrity in/
Cryptographic Protocols", in Proceedings of the IEEE Symposium/
on Research in Security and Privacy, Oakland, California, May/
1992./
/
[14] International Organization for Standardization, "ISO Information/
Processing Systems - Data Communication High-Level Data Link/
Control Procedure - Frame Structure", IS 3309, October 1984, 3rd/
Edition./
/
[15] Rivest, R., "The MD4 Message Digest Algorithm", RFC 1320, MIT/
Laboratory for Computer Science, April 1992./
/
[16] Rivest, R., "The MD5 Message Digest Algorithm", RFC 1321, MIT/
Laboratory for Computer Science, April 1992./
/
[17] Bellovin S., and M. Merritt, "Limitations of the Kerberos/
Authentication System", Computer Communications Review, Vol./
20(5), pp. 119-132, October 1990./
|
|
9.
|
Qualification of
ISOC/IETF:
|
|
|
9.1-9.6 Decisions of ITU Council to admit ISOC to participate in the work of the Sector (June 1995 and June 1996).
9.7 The Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG) is responsible for ongoing maintenance of the RFCs when the need arises. Comments on RFCs and corresponding changes are accommodated through the existing standardization process.
9.8 Each revision of a given RFC has a different RFC number, so no confusion is possible. All RFCs always remain available on-line. An index of RFCs and their status may be found in the IETF archives at http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc.html.
|
|
10.
|
Other (for any supplementary information):
|
|
|
None
|
|
