See below. I think (not quite sure) that this is better discussed on the kitten list.
Ta, S. -------- Original Message -------- Subject: [kitten] [IANA #731918] SASL mechanism not listed Date: Mon, 24 Mar 2014 19:33:06 +0000 From: Stephen Farrell <stephen.farr...@cs.tcd.ie> To: kit...@ietf.org <kit...@ietf.org> CC: iana-questi...@iana.org <iana-questi...@iana.org> Hiya, IANA were asked the following question a while back, but I dropped the ball;-) I'd appreciate your thoughts on the matter. I'm not quite sure which registries are meant exactly though. (I'll also forward to the oauth WG, but not cross-post) Thanks, S. <start> The following draft describes a SASL mechanism that is in use on GMail and should not therefore be allocated to another scheme unless we want bad things to happen. http://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-murchison-sasl-login-00.txt The strings XOAUTH and XOAUTH2 are also being used for a preliminary version of the OAUTH spec as well. The reason Google is using this particular mechanism rather than PLAIN is that it is the one that has the widest client support: http://www.fehcom.de/qmail/smtpauth.html So it would be a real disaster if this particular code point was re-issued. It would probably be a good idea if every registry had a list of 'dirty' code points that must not be reused because there are existing applications. <end> _______________________________________________ Kitten mailing list kit...@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/kitten _______________________________________________ OAuth mailing list OAuth@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth
