Re: [SECMECH] AAA requirement for middleware

Nicolas Williams <Nicolas.Williams@sun.com> Tue, 28 June 2005 21:20 UTC

Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1DnNVL-0006OD-J4; Tue, 28 Jun 2005 17:20:27 -0400
Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1DnNVK-0006O3-Ib for secmech@megatron.ietf.org; Tue, 28 Jun 2005 17:20:26 -0400
Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA27207 for <secmech@ietf.org>; Tue, 28 Jun 2005 17:20:22 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from nwkea-mail-2.sun.com ([192.18.42.14]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1DnNug-0002bc-GX for secmech@ietf.org; Tue, 28 Jun 2005 17:46:41 -0400
Received: from centralmail1brm.Central.Sun.COM ([129.147.62.1]) by nwkea-mail-2.sun.com (8.12.10/8.12.9) with ESMTP id j5SLKJFF017436 for <secmech@ietf.org>; Tue, 28 Jun 2005 14:20:19 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from binky.Central.Sun.COM (binky.Central.Sun.COM [129.153.128.104]) by centralmail1brm.Central.Sun.COM (8.12.10+Sun/8.12.10/ENSMAIL, v2.2) with ESMTP id j5SLKI3b026094 for <secmech@ietf.org>; Tue, 28 Jun 2005 15:20:19 -0600 (MDT)
Received: from binky.Central.Sun.COM (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by binky.Central.Sun.COM (8.13.3+Sun/8.13.3) with ESMTP id j5SLKHpO021198; Tue, 28 Jun 2005 16:20:17 -0500 (CDT)
Received: (from nw141292@localhost) by binky.Central.Sun.COM (8.13.3+Sun/8.13.3/Submit) id j5SLKD1W021197; Tue, 28 Jun 2005 16:20:13 -0500 (CDT)
Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2005 16:20:13 -0500
From: Nicolas Williams <Nicolas.Williams@sun.com>
To: Josh Howlett <Josh.Howlett@bristol.ac.uk>
Subject: Re: [SECMECH] AAA requirement for middleware
Message-ID: <20050628212013.GV16670@binky.Central.Sun.COM>
References: <7210B31550AC934A8637D6619739CE69056DCF3E@e2k-sea-xch2.sea-alpha.cisco.com> <Pine.GSO.4.44.0506281951330.2267-100000@shark.cse.bris.ac.uk>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <Pine.GSO.4.44.0506281951330.2267-100000@shark.cse.bris.ac.uk>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.7i
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: 08e48e05374109708c00c6208b534009
Cc: secmech@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: secmech@lists.ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Security mechanisms BOF <secmech.lists.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/secmech>, <mailto:secmech-request@lists.ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/secmech>
List-Post: <mailto:secmech@lists.ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:secmech-request@lists.ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/secmech>, <mailto:secmech-request@lists.ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: secmech-bounces@lists.ietf.org
Errors-To: secmech-bounces@lists.ietf.org

On Tue, Jun 28, 2005 at 08:35:44PM +0100, Josh Howlett wrote:
> FWIW, a useful outcome of the SECMECH discussion might be a consistent
> glossary :-)

Sure, but, do not expect a unified glossary... :/

Nico
-- 

_______________________________________________
SECMECH mailing list
SECMECH@lists.ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/secmech