diff --git a/doc/standardisation/draft-ietf-kitten-gssapi-prf-01.txt b/doc/standardisation/draft-ietf-kitten-gssapi-prf-01.txt
new file mode 100644
index 000000000..99676165d
--- /dev/null
+++ b/doc/standardisation/draft-ietf-kitten-gssapi-prf-01.txt
@@ -0,0 +1,505 @@
+
+
+NETWORK WORKING GROUP                                        N. Williams
+Internet-Draft                                                       Sun
+Expires: December 30, 2004                                     July 2004
+
+
+                  A PRF API extension for the GSS-API
+                  draft-ietf-kitten-gssapi-prf-01.txt
+
+Status of this Memo
+
+   By submitting this Internet-Draft, I certify that any applicable
+   patent or other IPR claims of which I am aware have been disclosed,
+   and any of which I become aware will be disclosed, in accordance with
+   RFC 3668.
+
+   Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
+   Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups.  Note that
+   other groups may also distribute working documents as
+   Internet-Drafts.
+
+   Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
+   and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
+   time.  It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
+   material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
+
+   The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at
+   http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt.
+
+   The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at
+   http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html.
+
+   This Internet-Draft will expire on December 30, 2004.
+
+Copyright Notice
+
+   Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2004).  All Rights Reserved.
+
+Abstract
+
+   This document defines a Pseudo-Random Function (PRF) extension to the
+   Generic Security Service Applicatoin Programming Interface (GSS-API)
+   for keying application protocols given an established GSS-API
+   security context.  The primary intended use of this function is to
+   key secure session layers that don't or cannot use GSS-API
+   per-message MIC (message integrity check) and wrap tokens for session
+   protection.
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Williams               Expires December 30, 2004                [Page 1]
+
+Internet-Draft      A PRF Extension for the GSS-API            July 2004
+
+
+Table of Contents
+
+   1.  Conventions used in this document  . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  3
+   2.  Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  4
+   3.  GSS_Pseudo_random()  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  5
+   3.1 C-Bindings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  5
+   4.  Security Considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  7
+   5.  References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  8
+   5.1 Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  8
+   5.2 Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  8
+       Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  8
+       Intellectual Property and Copyright Statements . . . . . . . .  9
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Williams               Expires December 30, 2004                [Page 2]
+
+Internet-Draft      A PRF Extension for the GSS-API            July 2004
+
+
+1.  Conventions used in this document
+
+   The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
+   "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
+   document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119].
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Williams               Expires December 30, 2004                [Page 3]
+
+Internet-Draft      A PRF Extension for the GSS-API            July 2004
+
+
+2.  Introduction
+
+   A need has arisen for users of the GSS-API to key applications'
+   cryptographic protocols using established GSS-API security contexts.
+   Such applications can use the GSS-API for authentication, but not for
+   transport security (for whatever reasons), and since the GSS-API does
+   not provide a method for obtaining keying material from established
+   security contexts such applications cannot make effective use of the
+   GSS-API.
+
+   To address this need we define a pseudo-random function (PRF)
+   extension to the GSS-API.
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Williams               Expires December 30, 2004                [Page 4]
+
+Internet-Draft      A PRF Extension for the GSS-API            July 2004
+
+
+3.  GSS_Pseudo_random()
+
+   Inputs:
+
+   o  context CONTEXT handle,
+   o  prf_in OCTET STRING,
+   o  desired_output_len INTEGER
+
+   Outputs:
+
+   o  major_status INTEGER,
+   o  minor_status INTEGER,
+   o  prf_out OCTET STRING
+
+   Return major_status codes:
+   o  GSS_S_COMPLETE indicates no error.
+   o  GSS_S_NO_CONTEXT indicates that a null context has been provided
+      as input.
+   o  GSS_S_CONTEXT_EXPIRED indicates that an expired context has been
+      provided as input.
+   o  GSS_S_UNAVAILABLE indicates that the mechanism lacks support for
+      this function.
+   o  GSS_S_FAILURE indicates failure or lack of support; the minor
+      status code may provide additional information.
+
+   This function applies the established context's mechanism's keyed PRF
+   function to the input data (prf_in), keyed with key material
+   associated with the given security context and outputs the resulting
+   octet string (prf_out) of desired_output_len length.
+
+   The output string of this function MUST be a pseudo-random function
+   [GGM1][GGM2] of the input keyed with key material from the
+   established security context -- the chances of getting the same
+   output given different input parameters should be exponentially
+   small.
+
+   This function, applied to the same inputs by an initiator and
+   acceptor using the same established context, MUST produce the *same
+   results* for both, the initiator and acceptor, even if called
+   multiple times for the same context.
+
+   Mechanisms MAY limit the output of the PRF according, possibly in
+   ways related to the types of cryptographic keys available for the PRF
+   function, thus the prf_out output of GSS_Pseudo_random() MAY be
+   smaller than requested.
+
+3.1  C-Bindings
+
+
+
+
+Williams               Expires December 30, 2004                [Page 5]
+
+Internet-Draft      A PRF Extension for the GSS-API            July 2004
+
+
+   OM_uint32 gss_pseudo_random(
+     OM_uint32			*minor_status,
+     gss_ctx_id_t			context,
+     const gss_buffer_t		prf_in,
+     ssize_t		desired_output_len,
+     gss_buffer_t		prf_out
+   );
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Williams               Expires December 30, 2004                [Page 6]
+
+Internet-Draft      A PRF Extension for the GSS-API            July 2004
+
+
+4.  Security Considerations
+
+   Care should be taken in properly designing a mechanism's PRF
+   function.
+
+   GSS mechanisms' PRF functions should use a key derived from contexts'
+   session keys and should preserve the forward security properties of
+   the mechanisms' key exchanges.
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Williams               Expires December 30, 2004                [Page 7]
+
+Internet-Draft      A PRF Extension for the GSS-API            July 2004
+
+
+5.  References
+
+5.1  Normative References
+
+   [GGM1]     Goldreich, O., Goldwasser, S. and S. Micali, "How to
+              Construct Random Functions", October 1986.
+
+   [RFC2119]  Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
+              Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.
+
+   [RFC2743]  Linn, J., "Generic Security Service Application Program
+              Interface Version 2, Update 1", RFC 2743, January 2000.
+
+   [RFC2744]  Wray, J., "Generic Security Service API Version 2 :
+              C-bindings", RFC 2744, January 2000.
+
+5.2  Informative References
+
+   [GGM2]     Goldreich, O., Goldwasser, S. and S. Micali, "On the
+              Cryptographic Applications of Random Functions", 1985.
+
+   [RFC1750]  Eastlake, D., Crocker, S. and J. Schiller, "Randomness
+              Recommendations for Security", RFC 1750, December 1994.
+
+
+Author's Address
+
+   Nicolas Williams
+   Sun Microsystems
+   5300 Riata Trace Ct
+   Austin, TX  78727
+   US
+
+   EMail: Nicolas.Williams@sun.com
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Williams               Expires December 30, 2004                [Page 8]
+
+Internet-Draft      A PRF Extension for the GSS-API            July 2004
+
+
+Intellectual Property Statement
+
+   The IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any
+   Intellectual Property Rights or other rights that might be claimed to
+   pertain to the implementation or use of the technology described in
+   this document or the extent to which any license under such rights
+   might or might not be available; nor does it represent that it has
+   made any independent effort to identify any such rights.  Information
+   on the procedures with respect to rights in RFC documents can be
+   found in BCP 78 and BCP 79.
+
+   Copies of IPR disclosures made to the IETF Secretariat and any
+   assurances of licenses to be made available, or the result of an
+   attempt made to obtain a general license or permission for the use of
+   such proprietary rights by implementers or users of this
+   specification can be obtained from the IETF on-line IPR repository at
+   http://www.ietf.org/ipr.
+
+   The IETF invites any interested party to bring to its attention any
+   copyrights, patents or patent applications, or other proprietary
+   rights that may cover technology that may be required to implement
+   this standard.  Please address the information to the IETF at
+   ietf-ipr@ietf.org.
+
+
+Disclaimer of Validity
+
+   This document and the information contained herein are provided on an
+   "AS IS" basis and THE CONTRIBUTOR, THE ORGANIZATION HE/SHE REPRESENTS
+   OR IS SPONSORED BY (IF ANY), THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE INTERNET
+   ENGINEERING TASK FORCE DISCLAIM ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED,
+   INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF THE
+   INFORMATION HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED
+   WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.
+
+
+Copyright Statement
+
+   Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2004).  This document is subject
+   to the rights, licenses and restrictions contained in BCP 78, and
+   except as set forth therein, the authors retain all their rights.
+
+
+Acknowledgment
+
+   Funding for the RFC Editor function is currently provided by the
+   Internet Society.
+
+
+
+
+Williams               Expires December 30, 2004                [Page 9]
+
+
diff --git a/doc/standardisation/draft-ietf-kitten-krb5-gssapi-prf-01.txt b/doc/standardisation/draft-ietf-kitten-krb5-gssapi-prf-01.txt
new file mode 100644
index 000000000..a15914721
--- /dev/null
+++ b/doc/standardisation/draft-ietf-kitten-krb5-gssapi-prf-01.txt
@@ -0,0 +1,393 @@
+
+
+NETWORK WORKING GROUP                                        N. Williams
+Internet-Draft                                                       Sun
+Expires: December 30, 2004                                     July 2004
+
+
+               A PRF for the Kerberos V GSS-API Mechanism
+                draft-ietf-kitten-krb5-gssapi-prf-01.txt
+
+Status of this Memo
+
+   By submitting this Internet-Draft, I certify that any applicable
+   patent or other IPR claims of which I am aware have been disclosed,
+   and any of which I become aware will be disclosed, in accordance with
+   RFC 3668.
+
+   Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
+   Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups.  Note that
+   other groups may also distribute working documents as
+   Internet-Drafts.
+
+   Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
+   and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
+   time.  It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
+   material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
+
+   The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at
+   http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt.
+
+   The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at
+   http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html.
+
+   This Internet-Draft will expire on December 30, 2004.
+
+Copyright Notice
+
+   Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2004).  All Rights Reserved.
+
+Abstract
+
+   This document defines the Pseudo-Random Function (PRF) for the
+   Kerberos V mechanism for the Generic Security Service Application
+   Programming Interface (GSS-API), based on the PRF defined for the
+   Kerberos V cryptographic framework, for keying application protocols
+   given an established Kerberos V GSS-API security context.
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Williams               Expires December 30, 2004                [Page 1]
+
+Internet-Draft       A PRF for the Kerberos V Mech             July 2004
+
+
+Table of Contents
+
+   1. Conventions used in this document  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
+   2. Kerberos V GSS Mechanism PRF . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
+   3. Security Considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
+   4. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
+      Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
+      Intellectual Property and Copyright Statements . . . . . . . . . 7
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Williams               Expires December 30, 2004                [Page 2]
+
+Internet-Draft       A PRF for the Kerberos V Mech             July 2004
+
+
+1.  Conventions used in this document
+
+   The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
+   "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
+   document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119].
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Williams               Expires December 30, 2004                [Page 3]
+
+Internet-Draft       A PRF for the Kerberos V Mech             July 2004
+
+
+2.  Kerberos V GSS Mechanism PRF
+
+   The GSS-API PRF [GSS-PRF] function for the Kerberos V mechanism [CFX]
+   shall be the output of a PRF+ function based on the enctype's PRF
+   function keyed with the negotiated session key of the security
+   context and key usage X (TBD).
+
+   The security context MUST be fully established, else the mechanism
+   MUST fail with GSS_S_FAILURE as the major status code and
+   GSS_KRB5_S_KG_CTX_INCOMPLETE as the minor status code.
+
+   This PRF+ MUST be keyed with a key derived, with key usage (TBD),
+   from the session used by the initiator and acceptor, after the
+   security context is fully established, to derive keys for per-message
+   tokens.  For the current Kerberos V mechanism [CFX] this means that
+   the PRF+ MUST be keyed with the acceptor-asserted subkey, if it did
+   assert such a key, or the initiator's sub-session key otherwise.
+
+   The PRF+ function is a simple counter-based extension of the Kerberos
+   V pseudo-random function [KRB5-CRYPTO] for the enctype of the
+   security context's keys:
+
+   	PRF+(K, L, S) = truncate(L, T1 || T2 || .. || Tn)
+
+   	Tn = pseudo-random-function(K, n || S)
+
+   	where '||' is the concatenation operator, 'n' is encoded as a
+   	network byte order 32-bit unsigned binary number, and where
+   	truncate(L, S) truncates the input octet string S to length L.
+
+   The maximum output size of the Kerberos V mechanism's GSS-API PRF
+   then is, necessarily, 2^32 octets.
+
+   Implementations MUST support output size of up to 2^14 octets at
+   least.
+
+   If the implementation cannot produce the desired output then it MUST
+   output what it can.
+
+   The minimum input octet string length that implementations MUST
+   support is also 2^14 octets.  If the input octet string is longer
+   than the maximum that an implementation can process then the
+   implementation MUST fail with GSS_S_FAILURE as the major status code
+   and GSS_KRB5_S_KG_INPUT_TOO_LONG as the minor status code.
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Williams               Expires December 30, 2004                [Page 4]
+
+Internet-Draft       A PRF for the Kerberos V Mech             July 2004
+
+
+3.  Security Considerations
+
+   Kerberos V enctypes' PRF functions use a key derived from contexts'
+   session keys and should preserve the forward security properties of
+   the mechanisms' key exchanges.
+
+   Legacy Kerberos V enctypes may be weak, particularly the single-DES
+   enctypes.
+
+   See also [GSS-PRF] for generic security considerations of
+   GSS_Pseudo_random().
+
+   The computational cost of computing this PRF+ may vary depending on
+   the Kerberos V enctypes being used, but generally the computation of
+   this PRF+ gets more expensive as the input and output octet string
+   lengths grow (note that the use of a counter in the PRF+ construction
+   allows for parallelization).  This means that if an application can
+   be tricked into providing very large input octet strings and
+   requesting very long output octet strings then that may constitue a
+   denial of service attack on the application; therefore applications
+   SHOULD place appropriate limits on the size of any input octet
+   strings received from their peers without integrity protection.
+
+4  Normative References
+
+   [CFX]      Zhu, L., Jaganathan, K. and S. Hartman, "The Kerberos
+              Version 5 GSS-API Mechanism: Version 2".
+
+   [GSS-PRF]  Williams, N., "A PRF API extension for the GSS-API".
+
+   [KRB5-CRYPTO]
+              Raeburn, K., "Encryption and Checksum Specifications for
+              Kerberos 5".
+
+   [RFC2119]  Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
+              Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.
+
+   [RFC2743]  Linn, J., "Generic Security Service Application Program
+              Interface Version 2, Update 1", RFC 2743, January 2000.
+
+   [RFC2744]  Wray, J., "Generic Security Service API Version 2 :
+              C-bindings", RFC 2744, January 2000.
+
+
+Author's Address
+
+   Nicolas Williams
+   Sun Microsystems
+
+
+
+Williams               Expires December 30, 2004                [Page 5]
+
+Internet-Draft       A PRF for the Kerberos V Mech             July 2004
+
+
+   5300 Riata Trace Ct
+   Austin, TX  78727
+   US
+
+   EMail: Nicolas.Williams@sun.com
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Williams               Expires December 30, 2004                [Page 6]
+
+Internet-Draft       A PRF for the Kerberos V Mech             July 2004
+
+
+Intellectual Property Statement
+
+   The IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any
+   Intellectual Property Rights or other rights that might be claimed to
+   pertain to the implementation or use of the technology described in
+   this document or the extent to which any license under such rights
+   might or might not be available; nor does it represent that it has
+   made any independent effort to identify any such rights.  Information
+   on the procedures with respect to rights in RFC documents can be
+   found in BCP 78 and BCP 79.
+
+   Copies of IPR disclosures made to the IETF Secretariat and any
+   assurances of licenses to be made available, or the result of an
+   attempt made to obtain a general license or permission for the use of
+   such proprietary rights by implementers or users of this
+   specification can be obtained from the IETF on-line IPR repository at
+   http://www.ietf.org/ipr.
+
+   The IETF invites any interested party to bring to its attention any
+   copyrights, patents or patent applications, or other proprietary
+   rights that may cover technology that may be required to implement
+   this standard.  Please address the information to the IETF at
+   ietf-ipr@ietf.org.
+
+
+Disclaimer of Validity
+
+   This document and the information contained herein are provided on an
+   "AS IS" basis and THE CONTRIBUTOR, THE ORGANIZATION HE/SHE REPRESENTS
+   OR IS SPONSORED BY (IF ANY), THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE INTERNET
+   ENGINEERING TASK FORCE DISCLAIM ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED,
+   INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF THE
+   INFORMATION HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED
+   WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.
+
+
+Copyright Statement
+
+   Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2004).  This document is subject
+   to the rights, licenses and restrictions contained in BCP 78, and
+   except as set forth therein, the authors retain all their rights.
+
+
+Acknowledgment
+
+   Funding for the RFC Editor function is currently provided by the
+   Internet Society.
+
+
+
+
+Williams               Expires December 30, 2004                [Page 7]
+
+