1995-10-31 - Re: Keyed-MD5, ITAR, and HTTP-NG

Header Data

From: Mike_Spreitzer.PARC@xerox.com
To: hallam@w3.org
Message Hash: cf119cee3714490766932ff1850927468b402d7c420a2ebf9e88f3006162d9cf
Message ID: <95Oct31.115132pst.”14646(5)”@alpha.xerox.com>
Reply To: <9510310427.AA28252@zorch.w3.org>
UTC Datetime: 1995-10-31 20:59:25 UTC
Raw Date: Wed, 1 Nov 1995 04:59:25 +0800

Raw message

From: Mike_Spreitzer.PARC@xerox.com
Date: Wed, 1 Nov 1995 04:59:25 +0800
To: hallam@w3.org
Subject: Re: Keyed-MD5, ITAR, and HTTP-NG
In-Reply-To: <9510310427.AA28252@zorch.w3.org>
Message-ID: <95Oct31.115132pst."14646(5)"@alpha.xerox.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


Isn't this what the GSS-API is about?  Couldn't HTTP-NG just convey GSS
"tokens", and do something about getting both sides to agree on which GSS
"mechanism" is to be used, and on what Principals are involved?

Thread

• Return to October 1995

• Return to “hallam@w3.org”
• Return to “John Lull <lull@acm.org>”
• Return to “Mike_Spreitzer.PARC@xerox.com”

• Return to “Rich Salz <rsalz@osf.org>”

• 1995-10-31 (Tue, 31 Oct 1995 12:05:03 +0800) - Re: Keyed-MD5, ITAR, and HTTP-NG - Rich Salz <rsalz@osf.org>
  • 1995-10-31 (Tue, 31 Oct 1995 12:54:37 +0800) - Re: Keyed-MD5, ITAR, and HTTP-NG - hallam@w3.org
    • 1995-10-31 (Wed, 1 Nov 1995 02:22:27 +0800) - Re: Keyed-MD5, ITAR, and HTTP-NG - John Lull <lull@acm.org>
      • 1995-10-31 (Wed, 1 Nov 1995 04:16:56 +0800) - Re: Keyed-MD5, ITAR, and HTTP-NG - hallam@w3.org
        • 1995-10-31 (Wed, 1 Nov 1995 07:13:35 +0800) - Re: Keyed-MD5, ITAR, and HTTP-NG - John Lull <lull@acm.org>
    • 1995-10-31 (Wed, 1 Nov 1995 04:59:25 +0800) - Re: Keyed-MD5, ITAR, and HTTP-NG - Mike_Spreitzer.PARC@xerox.com