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

Re: Comments on X.509 SASL Authentication Mechanism

On Sat, 18 Apr 1998, Steve Kille wrote:
> I've had a few positive and no negative reactions.  It would be useful
> to me and I suspect to the area directors to see how people feel about
> this work.

I think this is very useful work.  With LDAPv3 done and TLS and S/MIMEv3
just around the corner, I suspect a lot of X.509 infrastructure will be
built and the simpler it is to use it, the better.  It'd be nice if the
full weight of TLS isn't necessary to take advantage of such an
infrastructure.

I also think the decision of whether or not it should be in a WG is best
deferred until you believe the specification is complete.  WGs tend to do
poorly with premature specs.

To be honest, I also don't see a lot of vendors jumping for the
altnerative "Simple [sic] Public Key Mechanism" (RFC 2025).  I think the
design of that spec is similar enough to PEM and MOSS that it deserves the
same fate.

		- Chris