> At present, I believe that the problem reported is an implementation
> bug in MIT Kerberos *NOT* a protocol weakness, and further, that this
> bug was fixed in the kaserver in
The COAST anouncment was a little vauge regarding what, exactly, was
wrong. Don't blame them. My use of the term "protocol" referred to
the two `things' supported by kaserver, not to the actual problem
COAST found. It is a request that whatever anouncement Transarc
makes addresses both `things' supported by kaserver, and not just
AFS Kerberos.
Thanks for the (unofficial) info.
Mike
--
Michael D. Sofka [EMAIL PROTECTED]
ITS Systems Programmer TeX, AFS, NIS, NTP, Astronomy, Epistemology.
Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy, NY. http://www.rpi.edu/~sofkam/
