RFC 6112: Anonymity Support for Kerberos
This RFC has been replaced. Do not implement against it for new work — it was formally obsoleted by RFC 8062.
Current version: RFC 8062 — Anonymity Support for Kerberos
In plain English — editorial summary, not part of the RFC
This document defines extensions to the Kerberos protocol to allow a Kerberos client to securely communicate with a Kerberos application service without revealing its identity, or without revealing more than its Kerberos realm. It also defines extensions that allow a Kerberos client to obtain anonymous credentials without revealing its identity to the Kerberos Key Distribution Center (KDC). This document updates RFCs 4120, 4121, and 4556. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Document record
- Document ID
- RFC6112
- Published
- April 2011
- Authors
- L. Zhu; P. Leach; S. Hartman
- Status
- HISTORIC
- Stream
- IETF
- Area
- sec
- Pages
- 16
- Also known as
- —
- Obsoleted by:
- RFC 8062
Topics
Referenced by
One later RFC formally updates or obsoletes part of this document.
Related documents
Ranked automatically by shared keywords, IETF area and stream — not by editorial selection.
- RFC 6113A Generalized Framework for Kerberos Pre-AuthenticationCurrent
April 2011
- RFC 6111Additional Kerberos Naming ConstraintsCurrent
April 2011
- RFC 6071IP Security (IPsec) and Internet Key Exchange (IKE) Document RoadmapCurrent
February 2011
- RFC 6066Transport Layer Security (TLS) Extensions: Extension DefinitionsUpdated
January 2011
- RFC 6158RADIUS Design GuidelinesUpdated
March 2011
- RFC 6063Dynamic Symmetric Key Provisioning Protocol (DSKPP)Current
December 2010
- RFC 6054Using Counter Modes with Encapsulating Security Payload (ESP) and Authentication Header (AH) to Protect Group TrafficCurrent
November 2010
- RFC 6170Internet X.509 Public Key Infrastructure -- Certificate ImageObsoleted
May 2011
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?