- From: John Franks <john@math.nwu.edu>
- Date: Thu, 22 Feb 1996 09:55:46 -0600 (CST)
- To: Larry Masinter <masinter@parc.xerox.com>
- Cc: http-wg%cuckoo.hpl.hp.com@hplb.hpl.hp.com
On Thu, 22 Feb 1996, Larry Masinter wrote: > John, > > My notes say that we are expecting a new draft of digest > authentication from the authors, of which you are one. > > Your note left me with the impression that you are unaware of any > plans to update the specification. > > Did I just imagine that we were going to see a revised draft? If not > from you, from whom? It is my recollection that Jeff Hostetler at Spyglass agreed to write a new version. But I could be wrong. While there are a number of "authors" who contributed to the proposal, it originated with Spyglass. Obviously, I would like to see the proposal advance. It seems to me that it is appropriate for the revisions to come from Spyglass as they have the greatest vested interest in existing commercial implementations. Also they (presumably) get paid for doing this stuff and I don't. Changes along the lines you list would be valuable and should be made. I do not believe these changes would cause any existing implementations to cease to function. I remain hopeful that digest authentication will be widely implemented and I did not intend to convey anything to the contrary. My point was that people should be aware that changes which break existing commercial implementations would require a *very compelling argument*. I do not find the arguments so far to be that compelling and I have no vested interest in current implementations. I suspect those with investment in current implementations will also not find the arguments sufficiently compelling. John Franks Dept of Math. Northwestern University john@math.nwu.edu
Received on Thursday, 22 February 1996 07:59:17 UTC