- From: Larry Masinter <masinter@parc.xerox.com>
- Date: Thu, 29 Aug 1996 23:48:35 PDT
- To: jg@zorch.w3.org
- Cc: paulh@imc.org, http-wg%cuckoo.hpl.hp.com@hplb.hpl.hp.com, Harald.T.Alvestrand@uninett.no, moore@cs.utk.edu
Personally, I don't see any point in a short RFC that says that you're required to implement what's in draft-http-digest-aa-04.txt, because *that* draft is pretty weak. If working group members really want to REQUIRE that you MUST REALLY implement digest authentication, I think we would have to revise draft-http-digest-aa-04.txt so that it actually stated some requirements where "MUST IMPLEMENT" actually meant something. Personally, I think it's a waste of time. Little applicability statements are the hobgoblins of ... well, you know how it goes. We should focus on more important things, like the HTTP/1.2 documents. The folks in distributed authoring and version management seem to also want us to consider LINK and LOCK and UNLOCK and GET-VERSION and a bunch of other things, too. We have lots of work. I guess people can get excited about "MUST implement digest authentication" but don't have time to actually make progress on the _real_ problems. Larry
Received on Thursday, 29 August 1996 23:50:35 UTC