RFC 5868: Problem Statement on the Cross-Realm Operation of Kerberos
In plain English — editorial summary, not part of the RFC
This document provides background information regarding large-scale Kerberos deployments in the industrial sector, with the aim of identifying issues in the current Kerberos cross-realm authentication model as defined in RFC 4120. This document describes some examples of actual large-scale industrial systems, and lists requirements and restrictions regarding authentication operations in such environments. It also identifies a number of requirements derived from the industrial automation field. Although they are found in the field of industrial automation, these requirements are general enough and are applicable to the problem of Kerberos cross-realm operations. This document is not an Internet Standards Track specification; it is published for informational purposes.
Document record
- Document ID
- RFC5868
- Published
- May 2010
- Authors
- S. Sakane; K. Kamada; S. Zrelli; M. Ishiyama
- Status
- INFORMATIONAL
- Stream
- IETF
- Area
- sec
- Pages
- 13
- Also known as
- —
Related documents
Ranked automatically by shared keywords, IETF area and stream — not by editorial selection.
- RFC 5877The application/pkix-attr-cert Media Type for Attribute CertificatesCurrent
May 2010
- RFC 5879Heuristics for Detecting ESP-NULL PacketsCurrent
May 2010
- RFC 5848Signed Syslog MessagesCurrent
May 2010
- RFC 5840Wrapped Encapsulating Security Payload (ESP) for Traffic VisibilityCurrent
April 2010
- RFC 5836Extensible Authentication Protocol (EAP) Early Authentication Problem StatementCurrent
April 2010
- RFC 5911New ASN.1 Modules for Cryptographic Message Syntax (CMS) and S/MIMEUpdated
June 2010
- RFC 5912New ASN.1 Modules for the Public Key Infrastructure Using X.509 (PKIX)Updated
June 2010
- RFC 5913Clearance Attribute and Authority Clearance Constraints Certificate ExtensionCurrent
June 2010
Also filed under
About this page
The document record above — title, authors, date, status, stream, area, relationships, DOI and errata — is imported verbatim from the public RFC Editor index. The “in plain English” section is editorial: written by The metasystema editorial team, not part of the RFC. Where the two differ, the RFC text governs.
Last checked against the RFC Editor index on . RFCs are never revised after publication; changes are issued as new documents.
Data sources · Editorial policy · Report a correction · What is an RFC?