On 03/26/2008 4:48 AM, Maciek Niedzielski wrote: > Alexey Melnikov pisze: >> Ralph Meijer wrote: >>> On Tue, 2008-03-25 at 15:16 -0600, Peter Saint-Andre wrote: >>>> Evan Schoenberg of the Adium project pinged offlist regarding the >>>> proper >>>> behavior for a client to follow if SASL authentication fails using one >>>> mechanism but other mechanisms are available. >>>> [..] >>> If one mechanism fails with <not-authorized/>, why would another one >>> succeed, exactly? >> Because different mechanisms might be using different authentication >> databases. For example DIGEST-MD5 and GSSAPI. > Is it usually possible for the server to know that failure was caused by > using wrong method? If yes, maybe it would be worth adding a different > error for this case?
As far as I can see there is not separate error for this case, but I may be missing something. Perhaps Alexey Melnikov can shed some light on this for us. :) Peter -- Peter Saint-Andre https://stpeter.im/
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
