If referring to lack of interest as "bigotry" makes you feel
good,
have at it. Poor, hard-done-by NTLM eh? The truth is that the
people developing most of this open source code have little
motivation to add features for a platform they don't use
themselves and for which there are few potential users.
In my experience, when someone has offered patches to allow
building on W2K, they're readily accepted and incorporated.
If there are no such patches available, it's because nobody
wanted the functionality badly enough. Contribute some patches
Larry.
There must be interest in adding NTLM support, Marek asked if there are
open-source servers that support NTLM. If I could contribute patches
without losing my job, I would, but since I'll be fired if I contribute
patches to an open source project, I'll respectfully decline (if you
really care, we can discuss what the GPL does to the ability of
professional software developers to contribute to GPL licensed projects
OFFLINE).
Not to be rude, but distributing the documentation as an
executable which decompresses as an MS Word document does
tend to limit the audience a bit. What possible reason
could there be for this other than bigotry?
Immediately below the .DOC file that you point out is a "Get Office file
viewer" link. If you follow that link, you will be pointed to the page
that includes the stand-alone word file viewer, it runs on any Win32
platform. Please look a little closer before you flame.
And I gave you a pointer to the first on-the-web version of the
documentation I found. If you want a different one, try
http://search.microsoft.com/gomsuri.asp?n=2&c=rp_Results&siteid=us/dev&t
arget=http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/en-us/security/Security/sspi_fun
ctions.asp
This is NOT rocket science - it took me all of 45 seconds of looking at
the msdn.microsoft.com web site to find it.
Larry Osterman
-----Original Message-----
From: Pete Naylor [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, March 27, 2002 11:59 AM
To: Larry Osterman
Cc: Marek Kowal; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Outlook express AUTH command
Larry Osterman wrote...
> IMHO, the only reason for an open source server running on W2K to NOT
> support NTLM authentication is bigotry
If referring to lack of interest as "bigotry" makes you feel good, have
at
it. Poor, hard-done-by NTLM eh? The truth is that the people
developing
most of this open source code have little motivation to add features for
a
platform they don't use themselves and for which there are few potential
users. In my experience, when someone has offered patches to allow
building on W2K, they're readily accepted and incorporated. If there
are
no such patches available, it's because nobody wanted the functionality
badly enough. Contribute some patches Larry.
> - the SSPI APIs needed to support
> NTLM are pretty simple to support and are well documented.
Not to be rude, but distributing the documentation as an executable
which
decompresses as an MS Word document does tend to limit the audience a
bit.
What possible reason could there be for this other than bigotry?
As it happens, I'm developing some software and would be willing to
consider supporting NTLM if it were documented sensibly - send me a
pointer to an RFC and I'll look into it as priorities allow.
--
Pete Naylor
