Re: Netscape vs. Digest (?)

• Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
• Next message: The IESG: "Protocol Action: A Proposed Extension to HTTP : Digest Access"
• Previous message: The IESG: "Protocol Action: Hypertext Transfer Protocol -- HTTP/1.1 to"
• Maybe in reply to: Michael Smith: "Netscape vs. Digest (?)"
• Next in thread: jg@zorch.w3.org: "Re: Netscape vs. Digest (?)"

Lou Montulli wrote:
> Why would you ever want to use digest if you already have
> certificate support?

I'll add some "practical" (non-technical) reasons:

(1)  Browsers do not permit sharing of certificates. The user must purchase
     a separate cert for each brand of browser they use.

(2)  Browsers have no "end-user" support for carrying certs around between
     computers. 

(3)  Corollary to (1/2): Server operator must be able to register and keep
     multiple certs for at least some of their users

Until certs are as portable as passwords, I think there are good reasons
for having something like Digest.

  -- Bob

• Next message: The IESG: "Protocol Action: A Proposed Extension to HTTP : Digest Access"
• Previous message: The IESG: "Protocol Action: Hypertext Transfer Protocol -- HTTP/1.1 to"
• Maybe in reply to: Michael Smith: "Netscape vs. Digest (?)"
• Next in thread: jg@zorch.w3.org: "Re: Netscape vs. Digest (?)"