Re: RFC: Revised authentication protocol

On Mon, Sep 19, 2016 at 9:52 AM, Olaf Buddenhagen wrote: > I'm a bit confused here: my understanding was that you essentially > wanted to implement a "single system instance" cluster. I would have > thought that would imply only a single instance of most servers -- >

Re: RFC: Revised authentication protocol

On Mon, Sep 19, 2016 at 09:52:38PM +0200, Olaf Buddenhagen wrote: > I'm a bit confused here: my understanding was that you essentially > wanted to implement a "single system instance" cluster. I would have > thought that would imply only a single instance of most servers -- > including auth --

Re: RFC: Revised authentication protocol

Olaf Buddenhagen, on Mon 19 Sep 2016 21:52:38 +0200, wrote: > Note that for the container solutions (lightweight virtualisation) I'm > envisioning for the Hurd -- with things like sub-users -- we are likely > to need some kind of auth delegation scheme or something like that; Well, AIUI we

Re: RFC: Revised authentication protocol

Hi, On Sun, Sep 04, 2016 at 10:29:54PM -1000, Brent W. Baccala wrote: > Here's my proposal for dealing with the authentication issue. > > There should be an extra send right passed from the auth server, to the > client, that the client then passes along to the server in its > authentication

Re: RFC: Revised authentication protocol

On Sun, Sep 04, 2016 at 10:29:54PM -1000, Brent W. Baccala wrote: > For those of you who have followed my netmsg threads, you may remember that > there were two major issues when I first got it running. One was > libpager's lack of multi-client support, which has been discussed at > length, and

RFC: Revised authentication protocol

Aloha - For those of you who have followed my netmsg threads, you may remember that there were two major issues when I first got it running. One was libpager's lack of multi-client support, which has been discussed at length, and the other was authentication, which we haven't discussed at all.