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

Reply via email to