Jeffrey Altman
> John Hascall 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?
> So that the clients have a way of knowing whether or not the cell
> supports the rxk5 protocol.
Wouldn't the normal Kerberos enctype negotiation do that?
That is, if the client asks for {AES,DES} and if it gets
back AES it knows it can use rxk5?
John
_______________________________________________
OpenAFS-info mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.openafs.org/mailman/listinfo/openafs-info
