"Shyh-Wei Luan/Almaden/IBM" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> If
> that happens, the current CellServDB mechanism is going to hurt. Lots
> of new little cells coming and going will be a management nightmare for
> everyone. Using DNS never happened
The following AFS-implementation cares about AFSDB-records in DNS:
http://www.stacken.kth.se/projekt/arla/
> originally because "that's a DFS
> feature", and then because the growth rate of the public "global name
> space" dropped off. Also the "ls /afs" problem could become
> serious.
There is an compiletime-option in arla that solves this problem, the
client just simply lies about date e.t.c. in /afs untill the info is
available.
> 4. A better way to punch through firewalls.
I am not with you here, tell people to open port 7000-7010,4711 for
UDP instead.
> 5. Better security
> (a) *good* cross-cell access control
> (b) unique server keys
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
I am absolutely with you here, there exists actually code for doing
this in the free AFSserver implementation 'milko'.
/Jimmy, Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm.
Some poeple got 2 copies of this, sorry.
