Russ Allbery <[email protected]> writes:
> Abe Singer <[email protected]> writes:
>
>> Well, that at least explains it.
>
>> You could call it a misfeature, or just an unanticipated consequence.
>> I suspect what we're doing here is a rare case.
>
> Actually, you are far from the only person to have had trouble with this.
> It's one of the more frequent complaints about the library behavior that
> I've seen, and it can cause some significant delays if one's DNS resolver
> is slow for some reason.
Thanks; this is useful input. Working around the address resolution
latency issue probably requires redesign of some internal interfaces,
as Greg mentioned, so we will need to allocate resources accordingly.
I've added it to the roadmap. If you and others could rank its
priority relative to the roadmap items that are already tentatively
slated for 1.9, that would also be helpful.
http://k5wiki.kerberos.org/wiki/Roadmap
________________________________________________
Kerberos mailing list [email protected]
https://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/kerberos
