[15615] in Kerberos_V5_Development
Re: Is this TGS-REP legal now?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Sam Hartman)
Thu Mar 18 10:54:29 2010
From: Sam Hartman <hartmans@mit.edu>
To: Weijun Wang <Weijun.Wang@sun.com>
Date: Thu, 18 Mar 2010 10:54:08 -0400
In-Reply-To: <9161B5BF-D935-432A-88B1-34568EBE1322@Sun.COM> (Weijun Wang's
message of "Thu, 18 Mar 2010 21:40:14 +0800")
Message-ID: <tsly6hpznn3.fsf@mit.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Cc: krbdev@mit.edu
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Errors-To: krbdev-bounces@mit.edu
>>>>> "Weijun" == Weijun Wang <Weijun.Wang@sun.com> writes:
Weijun> How do I interpret "the only case" below? It sounds like KDC
Weijun> should only return a referral if the request is for a TGT.
That's correct: RFC 4120 only permits referrals for TGTs.
Modern Kerberos uses the canonicalize flag to permit referrals in other
situations.
_______________________________________________
krbdev mailing list krbdev@mit.edu
https://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/krbdev
