No objection here.
On 3/2/22 2:13 PM, Quanah Gibson-Mount wrote:
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
-- Kenneth Murchison Senior Software Developer Fastmail US LLC ------------------------------------------ Cyrus: Devel Permalink: https://cyrus.topicbox.com/groups/devel/T385c6a3d6588dec9-M8c4071304a870b8deb21f8a7 Delivery options: https://cyrus.topicbox.com/groups/devel/subscription
