- From: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk>
- Date: Tue, 27 Aug 2013 10:37:48 +0000
- To: William Chan (???) <willchan@chromium.org>
- cc: Eliot Lear <lear@cisco.com>, "ietf-http-wg@w3.org Group" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
In message <CAA4WUYgn5jgTojch=Z7Kv=BONLzrwtyyjkuhHCkZ_FgnKE231Q@mail.gmail.com>, =?UTF-8?B?V2lsbGlhbSBDaGFuIC jpmYjmmbrmmIwp?= writes: >> >I agree authentication would be nice to have, >> >but I think it's unfair to criticize mandatory to offer *encryption* >> >because of authentication. >> >> When you say "encryption", do you mean "privacy" ? > >I mean encryption, because that's AIUI what mnot hinted at in his Berlin >presentation. That answer doesn't really help me any... In the email I cited, you used "encryption" as something apart from "authentication" and that left (at least) me confused about what the heck you were talking about ? Referencing mnot's slides doesn't really help me there... -- Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20 phk@FreeBSD.ORG | TCP/IP since RFC 956 FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.
Received on Tuesday, 27 August 2013 10:38:11 UTC