Re: SACRED Protocol (long!)

Marshall,

Thanks for your comments.

On Thu, 6 Dec 2001, Marshall T. Rose wrote:

> > -allow SACRED protocol exchanges to run on top of any reliable
> >  transport, including SOAP, http, BEEP, and other protocols,
> > -allow easy integration of other SASL mechanisms than SRP into the
> >  protocol, and
> > -allow the use of other security context establishment techniques
> >  than those provided by SASL.
>
> err, the dependence on beep is a good thing simply because it allows you to
> avoid having to deal with the 101 administrative issues that arise
> otherwise.

Actually Marshall, I think it is a good thing to run SACRED on top of
BEEP. However, I also do believe that it should be possible to run
SACRED on top of other protocols as well, including protocols that
does not have BEEP's support for SASL. By integrating SACRED's
security mechanism into SACRED itself we claim to achieve this.

> if you want to have something that runs on lots of different things, then
> can i suggest that you remove the beep support simply because you have very
> effectively negated 90% of the advantages of using beep...

BR,
-- Magnus