On Mon, Oct 5, 2009 at 4:54 PM, Russ Allbery <[email protected]> wrote: > Jeffrey Altman <[email protected]> writes: >> Derrick Brashear wrote: > >>> Actually, it's not. >>> >>> ttl = (p[0] << 24) | (p[1] << 16) | (p[2] << 8) | p[3]; >>> p += 4; /* Skip the TTL */ >>> >>> ... >>> if (!minttl || ttl < minttl) >>> minttl = ttl; >>> ... >>> acellInfo->timeout = minttl ? (time(0) + minttl) : 0; > >> Even better. There is nothing to say or fix. :-) > > Wow, I'm surprised. > > I do think that it would be worthwhile to mention this explicitly in the > draft, just because I didn't think of it and therefore other implementors > might not. I'll try to come up with some language for that.
Recommendations to implementors note at the end? -- Derrick _______________________________________________ AFS3-standardization mailing list [email protected] http://michigan-openafs-lists.central.org/mailman/listinfo/afs3-standardization
