- From: Charles Lindsey <chl@clerew.man.ac.uk>
- Date: Fri, 24 Sep 2004 11:02:20 +0100
- To: "Paul Hoffman / IMC" <phoffman@imc.org>, uri@w3.org
On Thu, 23 Sep 2004 09:55:46 -0700, Paul Hoffman / IMC <phoffman@imc.org> wrote: > At 12:30 PM +0100 9/23/04, Charles Lindsey wrote: >> So what do we want to do here? > > It sounds like you're happy pointing to 2369bis for <server>, yes? That > would be fine with me. We could even say "but you SHOULD implement the > username-password stuff because it is common today". Well presumably 2369bis provides the default for _any_ syntax not defined more specifically by some scheme. So yes, and maybe even with the sentence you suggest. But I am still curious as to how SASL suthentication is intended to be managed in this and other schemes, and whether we need anything like Al's 'snews' scheme. -- Charles H. Lindsey ---------At Home, doing my own thing------------------------ Tel: +44 161 436 6131 Fax: +44 161 436 6133 Web: http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/~chl Email: chl@clerew.man.ac.uk Snail: 5 Clerewood Ave, CHEADLE, SK8 3JU, U.K. PGP: 2C15F1A9 Fingerprint: 73 6D C2 51 93 A0 01 E7 65 E8 64 7E 14 A4 AB A5
Received on Friday, 24 September 2004 11:12:59 UTC