I filed an issue to remove the NTLM SASL mechanism starting with Cyrus-SASL
2.2. I think the discussion on the main SASL list today furthers this as
being necessary given what Simo discussed about it being a broken custom
implementation of NTLM. Are there any objections to this?
If someone wants to implement GSS-NTLMSSP at some point, they are welcome
to file a ticket on that and submit a PR, but I don't believe that should
be a gating factor to retiring the current NTLM code.
Regards,
Quanah
------------------------------------------
Cyrus: Devel
Permalink:
https://cyrus.topicbox.com/groups/devel/T385c6a3d6588dec9-Ma9afb3dc6ee1d5dbee250f76
Delivery options: https://cyrus.topicbox.com/groups/devel/subscription
