[Date Prev][Date Next]
[Chronological]
[Thread]
[Top]
RE: Comments about draft-ietf-ldapbis-authmeth-05.txt
- To: "Kurt D. Zeilenga" <Kurt@OpenLDAP.org>, "Alexey Melnikov" <Alexey.Melnikov@isode.com>
- Subject: RE: Comments about draft-ietf-ldapbis-authmeth-05.txt
- From: "Ramsay, Ron" <Ron.Ramsay@ca.com>
- Date: Thu, 14 Aug 2003 11:09:55 +1000
- Cc: "LDAPBis WG" <ietf-ldapbis@OpenLDAP.org>
- Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
- Thread-index: AcNhplnKjzTBKVQfQF+tgRfaE9mbRgAWiAOw
- Thread-topic: Comments about draft-ietf-ldapbis-authmeth-05.txt
But, but, but ....
They are being used in an LDAP context!
If Digest-MD5 has to be 'localised' to LDAP, it should be done. If it can't be done, let's choose something like CRAM-MD5 for the mandatory-to-implement authentication method.
Ron
-----Original Message-----
From: Kurt D. Zeilenga [mailto:Kurt@OpenLDAP.org]
Sent: Thursday, 14 August 2003 00:23
To: Alexey Melnikov
Cc: Ramsay, Ron; LDAPBis WG
Subject: Re: Comments about draft-ietf-ldapbis-authmeth-05.txt
At 06:14 AM 8/13/2003, Alexey Melnikov wrote:
>I suggest that some text about the issue should be included in draft-ietf-ldapbis-authmeth.
If authmeth says anything about DNs and DIGEST-MD5, it should say
that the DIGEST-MD5 username and realm fields are, per the DIGEST-MD5
TS, syntactically and semantically not DNs. They are syntactically
and semantically simple usernames and realms, respectively.
Kurt