To:
<ietf-provreg@cafax.se>
From:
"Paul George" <pgeorge@saraf.com>
Date:
Fri, 16 Feb 2001 08:58:31 -0500
Importance:
Normal
In-Reply-To:
<DF737E620579D411A8E400D0B77E671D750645@regdom-ex01.prod.netsol.com>
Sender:
owner-ietf-provreg@cafax.se
Subject:
RE: grrp-reqs-06, 3.2 Identification and Authentication [3]
It sounds fine to me. Paul George SARAF Software Solutions (703)538-5666 x234 -----Original Message----- From: owner-ietf-provreg@cafax.se [mailto:owner-ietf-provreg@cafax.se]On Behalf Of Hollenbeck, Scott Sent: Friday, February 16, 2001 8:39 AM To: ietf-provreg@cafax.se Subject: RE: grrp-reqs-06, 3.2 Identification and Authentication [3] Are there any objections to Andre's proposed re-wording? <Scott/> -----Original Message----- From: Andre Cormier [mailto:Andre.Cormier@viagenie.qc.ca] Sent: Wednesday, February 14, 2001 5:02 PM To: Kent Crispin Cc: ietf-provreg@cafax.se; Eric Brunner-Williams in Portland Maine Subject: Re: grrp-reqs-06, 3.2 Identification and Authentication [3] Here's a proposition: Lets change [3] The protocol or another layered protocol MUST provide services to negotiate an identification and authentication mechanism acceptable to both the server and the client. To [3] The protocol or another layered protocol MUST provide services to negotiate an authentication mechanism acceptable to both the server and the client. [snip]