>Here is another guess. The traces that I have that go directly to NTLMSSP >do not have bit-4 in the Flags2 field set, but do have bit-11 (EXT_SEC) >while the trace that I have that has bit-11 set, and uses SPNEGO, has >bit-4 set. > >This bit is undocumented. I bet it is the bit that says, don't use raw >NTLMSSP :-) Sorry, all my traces, whether raw NTLMSSP or SPNEGO-encapsulated NTLMSSP have this bit on.... at least through the negprot response (where it's already decided).
I agree with Steve, that it's probably determined by whether or not there is really an alternative... ---------------------------- Jim McDonough IBM Linux Technology Center Samba Team 6 Minuteman Drive Scarborough, ME 04074 USA [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Phone: (207) 885-5565 IBM tie-line: 776-9984
