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

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

To: Mark Ennis <mark.ennis@adacel.com>
Subject: Re: Simple+TLS as mandatory-to-implement (RE: Issues with current authmeth draft.)
From: "Kurt D. Zeilenga" <Kurt@OpenLDAP.org>
Date: Wed, 14 May 2003 16:54:33 -0700
Cc: ietf-ldapbis@OpenLDAP.org
In-reply-to: <3EC2CA3B.7040509@adacel.com>
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>

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: Mark Ennis <mark.ennis@adacel.com>

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: Mark Ennis <mark.ennis@adacel.com>

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