RE: [Asrg] 6. Proposals - Challenge/response

I guess what I would like is for a variety of authentication methods be
considered and determine if additional functionality is required within
CRI to accommodate.  I'm not endorsing a particular method, but would
like someone to possible show a scenario or two where one or more might
be used and determine if we require modifications.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: asrg-admin@ietf.org [mailto:asrg-admin@ietf.org] On Behalf Of
david
> nicol
> Sent: Wednesday, August 27, 2003 8:51 PM
> To: Eric Dean
> Cc: 'Deven T. Corzine'; 'Yakov Shafranovich'; 'Andrew Akehurst';
> asrg@ietf.org
> Subject: RE: [Asrg] 6. Proposals - Challenge/response - CRI
> 
> In the terms of my quoted message, listing a method or methods in the
> protocol would constitute approval.
> 
> Don't want to get bogged down in the morass of "violent agreement."
> 
> Cheers
> 
> 
> On Thu, 2003-08-21 at 09:54, Eric Dean wrote:
> > I'm not sure that we have to approve anything...we just have to have
a
> > protocol provide capabilities for interoperability..we don't have to
> > select a method..but rather design a protocol that will accommodate.
> 
> 
> > > I imagine one would hash all the MIME parts together.  Or do
whatever
> > > GPG does with a MIME message.  This but has been solved, there is
only
> > > to select an approach and approve it.
> 
> --
> David Nicol / If at first you don't succeed, use a bigger hammer.
>                                         http://gallaghersmash.com
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Asrg mailing list
> Asrg@ietf.org
> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg

_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg