Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sdd.hp.com!swrinde!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu!linac!att!ucbvax!frodo.JDSSC.DCA.MIL!blknowle
From: blknowle@frodo.JDSSC.DCA.MIL (Brad L. Knowles)
Newsgroups: comp.protocols.tcp-ip
Subject: Re: RFC 931 "Not Recommended"...
Message-ID: <9106191442.AA21581@frodo.jdssc.dca.mil>
Date: 19 Jun 91 14:42:56 GMT
Sender: daemon@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU
Organization: The Internet
Lines: 25

Mike, Dan, and any others who might be interested,

    Please do not interpret this as a flame, but somehow I get the
impression that you are on opposite sides of the fence on this issue (no
matter what kind of friends you may be), and I think it's about time we
let the issue drop.

    I am perfectly well interested in RFC implementations, no matter what
the status of the RFC, as well as the status of upcoming RFCs that may
well obsolete previous ones.  However, the argument of Kerberos/SNMP vs.
RFC 931 seems to be getting more emotional than rational.

    For my own part, I will ftp the source for the RFC 931 implementation,
if only to look at it.  I will also take a long look at any upcoming
network security RFCs or software (like Kerberos or the security features
of SNMP), because that is part of my job.  I think you agree on the goal,
but not how to get there (which is precisely the problem the Soviet Union
and the U.S. have had historically, as well as any other relatively large
country I know of).
 ________________________________________________________________________ 
| Brad Knowles                 | Internet: blknowle@frodo.jdssc.dca.mil  |
| DISA/DSSO/JNSL               | Ph: (703) 693-5849  Fax: (703) 693-7329 |
| The Pentagon, Room BE685     |-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-|
| Washington, D.C.  20301-7010 |  Speaking from, not for DISA (nee DCA)  |
 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~