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]