From: Rich Salz <rsalz@osf.org>
To: hallam@w3.org
Message Hash: f157f1c27588b258b38a0d30010e3bd2ca654a406a568e44367da845ac58beeb
Message ID: <9510312013.AA12543@sulphur.osf.org>
Reply To: N/A
UTC Datetime: 1995-10-31 21:22:00 UTC
Raw Date: Wed, 1 Nov 1995 05:22:00 +0800
From: Rich Salz <rsalz@osf.org>
Date: Wed, 1 Nov 1995 05:22:00 +0800
To: hallam@w3.org
Subject: Re: Keyed-MD5, ITAR, and HTTP-NG
Message-ID: <9510312013.AA12543@sulphur.osf.org>
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?
Yes, exactly. Of course negotiation and naming are often the harder
issues. It is a pity that HTTP-NG seems to be inventing protocol-specific
crypto-systems, rather then designing a general one and then being its
first customer.
/r$
Return to October 1995
Return to “Rich Salz <rsalz@osf.org>”
1995-10-31 (Wed, 1 Nov 1995 05:22:00 +0800) - Re: Keyed-MD5, ITAR, and HTTP-NG - Rich Salz <rsalz@osf.org>