RE: security in draft-ietf-provreg-epp-0.txt

["Hollenbeck, Scott" <shollenbeck@verisign.com>]

>-----Original Message-----
>From: Sam Hartman [mailto:hartmans@mit.edu]
>Sent: Monday, March 19, 2001 10:54 PM
>To: ietf-provreg@cafax.se
>Cc: hartmans@mit.edu
>Subject: security in draft-ietf-provreg-epp-0.txt
>
>

[snip]

>However, I think  that EPP would be significantly improved if it
>actually had security mechansims like SASL or TLS within the base
>protocol.  One easy way to do this would be to make EPP be a BEEP
>profile.

As architected, a BEEP profile can be written with no problem whatsoever.
Requiring BEEP contradicts other requirements for transport independence.

Needless to say, I disagree with the suggestion that SASL or TLS or anything
other than what's in there already should be required in the base protocol.
We've already architected a solution that allows appropriate security
service layers, and forcing those services into the base protocol can
introduce redundancy -- such as when SMTP transport with S/MIME or PGP
security is required.

<Scott/>