W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-dist-auth@w3.org > October to December 2005

Re: [Bug 18] no record of consensus for force-authenticate

From: Lisa Dusseault <lisa@osafoundation.org>
Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2005 13:07:21 -0800
Message-Id: <e35063789fe1be201d0a1e3e34de2bb5@osafoundation.org>
Cc: Jim Whitehead <ejw@soe.ucsc.edu>, Geoffrey M Clemm <geoffrey.clemm@us.ibm.com>, WebDav <w3c-dist-auth@w3.org>
To: Cullen Jennings <fluffy@cisco.com>
To clarify, would the Authorization header hacks I mentioned last week 
count as one of the known approaches?

Lisa

On Oct 31, 2005, at 10:56 AM, Cullen Jennings wrote:

>
>  Unless more than one person objects in the next week, I'm going to 
> invoke one of my rare Chair privileges and claim that looks like 
> consensus to me too.
>
>  On 10/31/05 10:05 AM, "Jim Whitehead" <ejw@soe.ucsc.edu> wrote:
>
>> However, I still think the right action here is:
>>
>>  * Create a new appendix in 2518bis
>>  * In this appendix, document the problem
>>  * Describe the known approaches for addressing the problem (If 
>> approach, 100-continue approach) and their issues
>>  * Create a separate draft focusing just on the Force-Authenticate 
>> approach, and discuss on HTTP-WG list.
>>
>>  Julian seems to think this is an OK approach. Geoff seems to think 
>> this is OK. Jim Luther agrees with the separate draft part.
>>
>>  Dang if that doesn't seem like something approaching rough consensus 
>> to me.
>>
>>  - Jim
>
>  
Received on Monday, 31 October 2005 21:07:48 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 2 June 2009 18:44:11 GMT