On 3.11.2016 00:18, Ben Lipton wrote:
On 10/20/2016 03:52 PM, Ben Lipton wrote:
On 10/17/2016 02:16 AM, Jan Cholasta wrote:
On 13.10.2016 17:23, Ben Lipton wrote:
Thank you, this was a really helpful clarification of your point.
Comments below. Once again, I'm sorry I missed the email for so
On 10/20/2016 03:52 PM, Ben Lipton wrote:
On 10/17/2016 02:16 AM, Jan Cholasta wrote:
On 13.10.2016 17:23, Ben Lipton wrote:
Thank you, this was a really helpful clarification of your point.
Comments below. Once again, I'm sorry I missed the email for so long.
Ben
On 09/05/2016 06:52 AM, Jan
On 10/17/2016 02:16 AM, Jan Cholasta wrote:
On 13.10.2016 17:23, Ben Lipton wrote:
Thank you, this was a really helpful clarification of your point.
Comments below. Once again, I'm sorry I missed the email for so long.
Ben
On 09/05/2016 06:52 AM, Jan Cholasta wrote:
On 27.8.2016 22:40, Ben
On 13.10.2016 17:23, Ben Lipton wrote:
Thank you, this was a really helpful clarification of your point.
Comments below. Once again, I'm sorry I missed the email for so long.
Ben
On 09/05/2016 06:52 AM, Jan Cholasta wrote:
On 27.8.2016 22:40, Ben Lipton wrote:
On 08/25/2016 04:11 PM, Rob
Thank you, this was a really helpful clarification of your point.
Comments below. Once again, I'm sorry I missed the email for so long.
Ben
On 09/05/2016 06:52 AM, Jan Cholasta wrote:
On 27.8.2016 22:40, Ben Lipton wrote:
On 08/25/2016 04:11 PM, Rob Crittenden wrote:
Ben Lipton wrote:
On
On 27.8.2016 22:40, Ben Lipton wrote:
On 08/25/2016 04:11 PM, Rob Crittenden wrote:
Ben Lipton wrote:
On 08/23/2016 03:54 AM, Jan Cholasta wrote:
On 8.8.2016 22:23, Ben Lipton wrote:
On 07/25/2016 07:45 AM, Jan Cholasta wrote:
On 25.7.2016 13:11, Alexander Bokovoy wrote:
On Mon, 25 Jul
On 08/25/2016 04:11 PM, Rob Crittenden wrote:
Ben Lipton wrote:
On 08/23/2016 03:54 AM, Jan Cholasta wrote:
On 8.8.2016 22:23, Ben Lipton wrote:
On 07/25/2016 07:45 AM, Jan Cholasta wrote:
On 25.7.2016 13:11, Alexander Bokovoy wrote:
On Mon, 25 Jul 2016, Jan Cholasta wrote:
On 20.7.2016
Ben Lipton wrote:
On 08/23/2016 03:54 AM, Jan Cholasta wrote:
On 8.8.2016 22:23, Ben Lipton wrote:
On 07/25/2016 07:45 AM, Jan Cholasta wrote:
On 25.7.2016 13:11, Alexander Bokovoy wrote:
On Mon, 25 Jul 2016, Jan Cholasta wrote:
On 20.7.2016 16:05, Ben Lipton wrote:
Hi,
Thanks very much
On 08/23/2016 03:54 AM, Jan Cholasta wrote:
On 8.8.2016 22:23, Ben Lipton wrote:
On 07/25/2016 07:45 AM, Jan Cholasta wrote:
On 25.7.2016 13:11, Alexander Bokovoy wrote:
On Mon, 25 Jul 2016, Jan Cholasta wrote:
On 20.7.2016 16:05, Ben Lipton wrote:
Hi,
Thanks very much for the feedback!
On 8.8.2016 22:23, Ben Lipton wrote:
On 07/25/2016 07:45 AM, Jan Cholasta wrote:
On 25.7.2016 13:11, Alexander Bokovoy wrote:
On Mon, 25 Jul 2016, Jan Cholasta wrote:
On 20.7.2016 16:05, Ben Lipton wrote:
Hi,
Thanks very much for the feedback! Some responses below; I hope you'll
let me know
On 07/25/2016 07:45 AM, Jan Cholasta wrote:
On 25.7.2016 13:11, Alexander Bokovoy wrote:
On Mon, 25 Jul 2016, Jan Cholasta wrote:
On 20.7.2016 16:05, Ben Lipton wrote:
Hi,
Thanks very much for the feedback! Some responses below; I hope you'll
let me know what you think of my reasoning.
On
Simo Sorce wrote:
On Mon, 2016-07-25 at 18:05 +0300, Alexander Bokovoy wrote:
But maybe I'm not seeing the proper priorities here. Perhaps it's
more
of a problem because clients are easier to update with bugfixes than
the server? Or maybe the preference for the client is for
scalability
On Mon, 25 Jul 2016, Simo Sorce wrote:
On Mon, 2016-07-25 at 12:13 -0400, Ben Lipton wrote:
On 07/25/2016 11:07 AM, Simo Sorce wrote:
> On Mon, 2016-07-25 at 11:04 -0400, Simo Sorce wrote:
>> On Mon, 2016-07-25 at 10:51 -0400, Ben Lipton wrote:
>>> On 07/25/2016 05:07 AM, Simo Sorce wrote:
On Mon, 25 Jul 2016, Simo Sorce wrote:
On Mon, 2016-07-25 at 12:09 -0400, Ben Lipton wrote:
On 07/25/2016 12:03 PM, Simo Sorce wrote:
> On Mon, 2016-07-25 at 18:05 +0300, Alexander Bokovoy wrote:
>>> But maybe I'm not seeing the proper priorities here. Perhaps it's
>> more
>>> of a problem
On Mon, 2016-07-25 at 12:13 -0400, Ben Lipton wrote:
> On 07/25/2016 11:07 AM, Simo Sorce wrote:
> > On Mon, 2016-07-25 at 11:04 -0400, Simo Sorce wrote:
> >> On Mon, 2016-07-25 at 10:51 -0400, Ben Lipton wrote:
> >>> On 07/25/2016 05:07 AM, Simo Sorce wrote:
> On Mon, 2016-07-25 at 10:50
On Mon, 2016-07-25 at 12:09 -0400, Ben Lipton wrote:
> On 07/25/2016 12:03 PM, Simo Sorce wrote:
> > On Mon, 2016-07-25 at 18:05 +0300, Alexander Bokovoy wrote:
> >>> But maybe I'm not seeing the proper priorities here. Perhaps it's
> >> more
> >>> of a problem because clients are easier to update
On 07/25/2016 11:07 AM, Simo Sorce wrote:
On Mon, 2016-07-25 at 11:04 -0400, Simo Sorce wrote:
On Mon, 2016-07-25 at 10:51 -0400, Ben Lipton wrote:
On 07/25/2016 05:07 AM, Simo Sorce wrote:
On Mon, 2016-07-25 at 10:50 +0200, Jan Cholasta wrote:
Anyway, my main grudge is that the
On 07/25/2016 12:03 PM, Simo Sorce wrote:
On Mon, 2016-07-25 at 18:05 +0300, Alexander Bokovoy wrote:
But maybe I'm not seeing the proper priorities here. Perhaps it's
more
of a problem because clients are easier to update with bugfixes than
the server? Or maybe the preference for the client
On Mon, 2016-07-25 at 18:05 +0300, Alexander Bokovoy wrote:
> >But maybe I'm not seeing the proper priorities here. Perhaps it's
> more
> >of a problem because clients are easier to update with bugfixes than
> >the server? Or maybe the preference for the client is for
> scalability
> >reasons?
On Mon, 2016-07-25 at 11:04 -0400, Simo Sorce wrote:
> On Mon, 2016-07-25 at 10:51 -0400, Ben Lipton wrote:
> > On 07/25/2016 05:07 AM, Simo Sorce wrote:
> > > On Mon, 2016-07-25 at 10:50 +0200, Jan Cholasta wrote:
> > >> Anyway, my main grudge is that the transformation rules shouldn't
> > >>
On Mon, 25 Jul 2016, Ben Lipton wrote:
On 07/25/2016 05:07 AM, Simo Sorce wrote:
On Mon, 2016-07-25 at 10:50 +0200, Jan Cholasta wrote:
Anyway, my main grudge is that the transformation rules shouldn't
really
be stored on and processed by the server. The server should know the
*what* (mapping
On Mon, 2016-07-25 at 10:51 -0400, Ben Lipton wrote:
> On 07/25/2016 05:07 AM, Simo Sorce wrote:
> > On Mon, 2016-07-25 at 10:50 +0200, Jan Cholasta wrote:
> >> Anyway, my main grudge is that the transformation rules shouldn't
> >> really
> >> be stored on and processed by the server. The server
On 07/25/2016 05:07 AM, Simo Sorce wrote:
On Mon, 2016-07-25 at 10:50 +0200, Jan Cholasta wrote:
Anyway, my main grudge is that the transformation rules shouldn't
really
be stored on and processed by the server. The server should know the
*what* (mapping rules), but not the *how*
On 07/25/2016 08:12 AM, Alexander Bokovoy wrote:
On Mon, 25 Jul 2016, Jan Cholasta wrote:
This is turning out to be a common (and, I think, reasonable)
reaction
to the proposal. It is rather complex, and I worry that it will be
difficult to configure. On the other hand, there is some hidden
On Mon, 25 Jul 2016, Jan Cholasta wrote:
This is turning out to be a common (and, I think, reasonable) reaction
to the proposal. It is rather complex, and I worry that it will be
difficult to configure. On the other hand, there is some hidden
complexity to enabling a simpler config format, as
On 25.7.2016 13:11, Alexander Bokovoy wrote:
On Mon, 25 Jul 2016, Jan Cholasta wrote:
On 20.7.2016 16:05, Ben Lipton wrote:
Hi,
Thanks very much for the feedback! Some responses below; I hope you'll
let me know what you think of my reasoning.
On 07/20/2016 04:20 AM, Jan Cholasta wrote:
Hi,
On Mon, 25 Jul 2016, Jan Cholasta wrote:
On 20.7.2016 16:05, Ben Lipton wrote:
Hi,
Thanks very much for the feedback! Some responses below; I hope you'll
let me know what you think of my reasoning.
On 07/20/2016 04:20 AM, Jan Cholasta wrote:
Hi,
On 17.6.2016 00:06, Ben Lipton wrote:
On
On Mon, 2016-07-25 at 10:50 +0200, Jan Cholasta wrote:
> Anyway, my main grudge is that the transformation rules shouldn't
> really
> be stored on and processed by the server. The server should know the
> *what* (mapping rules), but not the *how* (transformation rules). The
> *how* is an
On 20.7.2016 16:05, Ben Lipton wrote:
Hi,
Thanks very much for the feedback! Some responses below; I hope you'll
let me know what you think of my reasoning.
On 07/20/2016 04:20 AM, Jan Cholasta wrote:
Hi,
On 17.6.2016 00:06, Ben Lipton wrote:
On 06/14/2016 08:27 AM, Ben Lipton wrote:
Hi,
On 17.6.2016 00:06, Ben Lipton wrote:
On 06/14/2016 08:27 AM, Ben Lipton wrote:
Hello all,
I have written up a design proposal for making certificate requests
easier to generate when using alternate certificate profiles:
On 06/14/2016 08:27 AM, Ben Lipton wrote:
Hello all,
I have written up a design proposal for making certificate requests
easier to generate when using alternate certificate profiles:
http://www.freeipa.org/page/V4/Automatic_Certificate_Request_Generation.
The use case for this is described
Hello all,
I have written up a design proposal for making certificate requests
easier to generate when using alternate certificate profiles:
http://www.freeipa.org/page/V4/Automatic_Certificate_Request_Generation.
The use case for this is described in
32 matches
Mail list logo
