Marsh Ray wrote:
>
> Martin Rex wrote:
> >
> > Even EKR admitted that implementing the update is an insignificant
> > amount of work.
> >
> > Pushing this point, that there were interoperable implementations
> > when this proposal was made in the IETF smells very much like
> > a request for rubbe
On 2009-12-02 09:08 PST, Chris Newman wrote:
> --On December 2, 2009 15:19:53 +0100 Martin Rex wrote:
>>>As draft-ietf-tls-renegotiation allows use of either the cipher suite
>>>value or the extension for C->S signaling, that mitigates the concern
>>>-- the field can choose the mecha
Thanks for your review.
On Mon, Nov 30, 2009 at 03:19:04PM -0500, Spencer Dawkins wrote:
> 1. Introduction
>
> The GS1 bridge failed to gain wide deployment for any GSS-API
> mechanism other than The "Kerberos V5 GSS-API mechanism" [RFC1964]
>
> Spencer (nit): s/The "Kerberos/"The Kerberos/
Hi Nico,
Nicolas Williams wrote:
13.3. Additional Recommendations
If the application requires security layers then it MUST prefer the
SASL "GSSAPI" mechanism over "GS2-KRB5" or "GS2-KRB5-PLUS".
Spencer (minor): If "prefer the mechanism" is the right way to describe
this, I apologize, but
On 2009-12-02, at 14:12, Phillip Hallam-Baker wrote:
> The alternative would be to not use .local at all and insist on that
> approach as a means of avoiding ICANNs perceived perogatives. I think
> that would be a bad idea as the spec would not serve its intended
> purpose.
Given the existing de
Total of 87 messages in the last 7 days.
script run at: Fri Dec 4 00:53:06 EST 2009
Messages | Bytes| Who
+--++--+
5.75% |5 | 4.37% |27062 | chesh...@apple.com
4.60% |4 | 5.35% |33167 | m...@sap.com
