[Date Prev][Date Next] [Chronological] [Thread] [Top]

Re: Simple+TLS as mandatory-to-implement (RE: Issues with current authmeth draft.)

To: "Kurt D. Zeilenga" <Kurt@OpenLDAP.org>
Subject: Re: Simple+TLS as mandatory-to-implement (RE: Issues with current authmeth draft.)
From: Mark Ennis <mark.ennis@adacel.com>
Date: Thu, 15 May 2003 10:17:11 +1000
Cc: ietf-ldapbis@OpenLDAP.org
In-reply-to: <5.2.0.9.0.20030514164309.02945370@127.0.0.1>
References: <5.2.0.9.0.20030514062827.02823dc8@127.0.0.1> <5.2.0.9.0.20030513074355.029edd18@127.0.0.1> <5.2.0.9.0.20030512195717.02923988@127.0.0.1> <5.2.0.9.0.20030512195717.02923988@127.0.0.1> <5.2.0.9.0.20030513074355.029edd18@127.0.0.1> <5.2.0.9.0.20030514062827.02823dc8@127.0.0.1> <5.2.0.9.0.20030514164309.02945370@127.0.0.1>
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; WinNT4.0; en-US; rv:1.3) Gecko/20030312

We've already had this argument. It is up to the working group to decide this. I doubt anyone could claim consensus has been reached on this topic so far.

- Mark.

Kurt D. Zeilenga wrote:

At 03:59 PM 5/14/2003, Mark Ennis wrote:
My preference is for a digest (or similar challenge/response) authentication mechanism which allows distinguished names as a form of the authentication identity.
Such a mechanism is not available to us.
Kurt

Follow-Ups:
- Re: Simple+TLS as mandatory-to-implement (RE: Issues with current authmeth draft.)
  - From: "Kurt D. Zeilenga" <Kurt@OpenLDAP.org>

References:
- Re: Simple+TLS as mandatory-to-implement (RE: Issues with current authmeth draft.)
  - From: "Kurt D. Zeilenga" <Kurt@OpenLDAP.org>
- Re: Simple+TLS as mandatory-to-implement (RE: Issues with current authmeth draft.)
  - From: "Kurt D. Zeilenga" <Kurt@OpenLDAP.org>
- Simple+TLS as mandatory-to-implement (RE: Issues with current authmeth draft.)
  - From: "Kurt D. Zeilenga" <Kurt@OpenLDAP.org>
- Re: Simple+TLS as mandatory-to-implement (RE: Issues with current authmeth draft.)
  - From: "Kurt D. Zeilenga" <Kurt@OpenLDAP.org>

Prev by Date: Re: Simple+TLS as mandatory-to-implement (RE: Issues with current authmeth draft.)
Next by Date: Re: Simple+TLS as mandatory-to-implement (RE: Issues with current authmeth draft.)
Index(es):
- Chronological
- Thread