Hello! On Sat, May 12, 2007 at 09:20:26PM +0200, Neal H. Walfield wrote: > At Sat, 12 May 2007 21:01:02 +0200, > Thomas Schwinge <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Yes, but that would require keeping some state in the server, which I > > wanted to avoid, because... > > As you have PORT and presumably an associated peropen, I am not > convinced by your argument.
Sorry, I can't follow you here. In my opinion, the server running on `/servers/io_perm' should be a simple proxy with some sort of internal access control. It should not needd to keep any state for every request. Regards, Thomas
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ Bug-hurd mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-hurd
