Re: [Isms] #32: is the securityName=username default OK?

To: dbharrington at comcast.net
Subject: Re: [Isms] #32: is the securityName=username default OK?
From: Sam Hartman <hartmans-ietf at mit.edu>
Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2005 07:50:03 -0400
Cc: isms at ietf.org
In-reply-to: <200510132210.SAA21149@ietf.org> (David B. Harrington's message of "Thu, 13 Oct 2005 18:09:56 -0400")
List-archive: <http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/isms>
List-help: <mailto:isms-request@lists.ietf.org?subject=help>
List-id: Mailing list for the ISMS working group <isms.lists.ietf.org>
List-post: <mailto:isms@lists.ietf.org>
List-subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/isms>, <mailto:isms-request@lists.ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/isms>, <mailto:isms-request@lists.ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
References: <200510132210.SAA21149@ietf.org>
Sender: isms-bounces at lists.ietf.org
User-agent: Gnus/5.1006 (Gnus v5.10.6) Emacs/21.3 (gnu/linux)

>>>>> "David" == David B Harrington <dbharrington at comcast.net> writes:

    David> #32: For an incoming message, is using a default
    David> securityName mapping the right thing to do?

Can you explain this in more detail?

_______________________________________________
Isms mailing list
Isms at lists.ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/isms

Follow-Ups:
- RE: [Isms] #32: is the securityName=username default OK?
  - From: David B Harrington
- [Isms] Issue #s and their context
  - From: David B Harrington

References:
- [Isms] #32: is the securityName=username default OK?
  - From: David B Harrington

Prev by Date: Re: [Isms] #1: is it important to support anonymous user accesstoSNMP?
Next by Date: Re: [Isms] #19: should RADIUS be exposed outside of SSH?
Previous by thread: [Isms] #32: is the securityName=username default OK?
Next by thread: [Isms] Issue #s and their context
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread

Re: [Isms] #32: is the securityName=username default OK?

Note: Messages sent to this list are the opinions of the senders and do not imply endorsement by the IETF.