John Hascall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> What makes your cell "rxk5" capable is if you have an >> "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" service key. > > That seems icky. Why does it have to have a different name?
I suspet that if it had the same name, the enc-types would be confused with AES vs. DES in the current clients. Additionally, using a different service principal ensures that only binaries that are setup to use the new principal will attempt to do so, allowing for current clients and servers to keep working while adding support for rxk5 to your cell, one server / client at a time. I'm assuming that something like afs-k5/[EMAIL PROTECTED] will work, as I already have multiple AFS cells using the same Kerberos realm. <<CDC _______________________________________________ OpenAFS-info mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openafs.org/mailman/listinfo/openafs-info
