Jeffrey Hutzelman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Discussion revealed that ideally, we'd like for the bit to be able to be > set distinctly for every directory, by the same users who can set the > ACL for that directory. However, this is difficult to do, requiring > changes to both the protocol and the format of the large vnode index. > It also has the issue that it's an awful lot of bits to set for sites > where ACL's have traditionally been sane.
This is perhaps a dumb idea, precisely because these bits already exist and may already be used for other things, but AFS *does* have the application ACL bits A-H. Using one of them for this purpose would break the existing semantics, though (which say that they have no meaning to AFS server processes). I don't have a good feeling on how many sites actually use them for something now, only that I've never seen them mentioned in the context of actually being used in any of the public mailing list traffic about AFS I've read. -- Russ Allbery ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/> _______________________________________________ AFS3-standardization mailing list [email protected] http://michigan-openafs-lists.central.org/mailman/listinfo/afs3-standardization
