Re: [Ietf-krb-wg] AD review of draft-ietf-krb-wg-otp-preauth

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Aug 19, 2011, at 7:48 AM, Sam Hartman wrote:

>>>>>> "Greg" == Greg Hudson <ghudson@xxxxxxx> writes:
> 87
>    Greg> On Fri, 2011-08-19 at 08:53 -0400, gareth.richards@xxxxxxx wrote:
>>> I had always thought the same way as Sam, that clients would be
>>> required to implement all of the options since there appears to
>>> be no other way for them to support different disconnected token
>>> types.  The specification was intended to be token independent
>>> and the assumption was always that the clients would also be.
> 
>    Greg> I agree, at least at the general level and for disconnected
>    Greg> tokens.  (Does nextOTP make any sense for disconnected
>    Greg> tokens?)
> 
> I think you prompt the person to hit the next value button

Or else wait for the time to roll-over to the next.

------------------------------------------------------
The opinions expressed in this message are mine,
not those of Caltech, JPL, NASA, or the US Government.
Henry.B.Hotz@xxxxxxxxxxxx, or hbhotz@xxxxxxx



_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf


[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Fedora Users]