On 6 Mar 2013, at 21:33, Benjamin Kaduk wrote: > On Wed, 6 Mar 2013, Benjamin Kaduk wrote: >> >> Still awaiting input here.
I would be inclined to remove the text entirely, and leave it up to implementors. Whilst I don't think there's any case in which rxgk-afs should be accepting arbitrary acceptor names, there are situations where it may be appropriate to do so when we're doing per-server negotiation. > We also should specify a name type to be used when importing the principal > name afs-rxgk@_afs.<cellname>, presumably GSS_C_NT_HOSTBASED_SERVICE. Yes. Cheers, Simon _______________________________________________ AFS3-standardization mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openafs.org/mailman/listinfo/afs3-standardization
