FYI, resolution of "Digest" issue

I sent the following note to the area directors, as my reading of the
intent of the working group and the current status:

================================================================

Date: Thu, 29 Aug 96 09:47:50 -0700
To: Harald.T.Alvestrand@uninett.no
CC: moore@cs.utk.edu,dsr@w3.org,jg@w3.org
In-reply-to: <8467.841303987@domen.uninett.no>
	(Harald.T.Alvestrand@uninett.no)
Subject: digest authentication summary
From: Larry Masinter <masinter@parc.xerox.com>

I missed the message, but saw some of the replies.

I think the consensus of the working group is that Digest
Authentication is a part of HTTP/1.1. Fortunately, what people in the
WG were talking about ("Must implement digest if they implement
basic") is actually moot, since "implement" can mean the "null
implementation", if you peer at draft-ietf-http-digest-aa-04.txt.

So, I think we should just go ahead with the two documents; it would
be convenient to include in section 11.2 a simple statement that

"The HTTP/1.1 protocol includes the Digest Access Authentication,
which is described in RFC XXXX."

I think this captures the intent of the working group and what it is
that got voted on in last call.

I think we should instruct the RFC editor to change the title of
draft-ietf-http-digest-aa-04.txt from

	"A Proposed Extension to HTTP: Digest Access Authentication"

to

	"Digest Access Authentication for HTTP"

I'm sorry for causing a flap by forwarding the note to the working
group instead of just responding directly. Actually, I think I may
have mainly been trying to SHARE THE GOOD NEWS that both had been
voted on by the IESG.

Larry

Received on Thursday, 29 August 1996 11:44:51 UTC