Subject: Re: [saag] Input for conflict review of draft-secure-cookie-session-protocol

From: =JeffH <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2012 10:47:36 -0700

[email-masked] suggested..
 >
 > If it were called "KoanLogic's Secure cookie Sessions
 > for HTTP" would that then be ok? IMO, it ought. That way,
 > the independent-stream RFC won't confuse anyone into
 > thinking that the IETF as a whole has developed this, but
 > if some IETF WG wants to do similar work, this could be
 > useful input. (And adding one word seems likely quicker
 > than organising and coming to IETF rough consensus;-)
 >
 > What do folks (incl. authors) think of that?
 >

+1

this has been done with e.g. various of Microsoft's work...

5385 Version 2.0 Microsoft Word Template for Creating Internet Drafts
      and RFCs. J. Touch. February 2010. (Format: TXT=38421 bytes)
      (Obsoletes RFC3285) (Status: INFORMATIONAL)

4757 The RC4-HMAC Kerberos Encryption Types Used by Microsoft Windows.
      K. Jaganathan, L. Zhu, J. Brezak. December 2006. (Format: TXT=36562
      bytes) (Updated by RFC6649) (Status: INFORMATIONAL)

4559 SPNEGO-based Kerberos and NTLM HTTP Authentication in Microsoft
      Windows. K. Jaganathan, L. Zhu, J. Brezak. June 2006. (Format:
      TXT=16088 bytes) (Status: INFORMATIONAL)

etc.

HTH,

=JeffH