[15830] in Kerberos_V5_Development
Re: Sanity check: GSSAPI SPI simplifications
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Nicolas Williams)
Mon May 24 21:38:33 2010
Date: Mon, 24 May 2010 20:37:05 -0500
From: Nicolas Williams <Nicolas.Williams@oracle.com>
To: Love =?iso-8859-1?Q?H=F6rnquist_=C5strand?= <lha@kth.se>
Message-ID: <20100525013705.GZ9605@oracle.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <13D0E62C-E6AC-4F12-8354-AB0A44EA518D@kth.se>
Cc: "krbdev@mit.edu" <krbdev@mit.edu>, Jeffrey Hutzelman <jhutz@cmu.edu>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Errors-To: krbdev-bounces@mit.edu
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
On Mon, May 24, 2010 at 06:13:35PM -0700, Love Hörnquist Åstrand wrote:
> 24 maj 2010 kl. 15:49 skrev Jeffrey Hutzelman:
> > ...
>
> All good points, however duplicating code is multiple layers hides bugs and increases code size, either good either.
Agreed. I *like* the API as the SPI, but not to the point where
mechanisms can be used directly without the mechglue. And that not so
much because of various problems that arise (think memory mgmt, though
in v3 we could fix most of these if we really wanted to) but because
there's no point: no one is going to that, because nobody really has
when they've had the choice even of using just one mechanism through the
mechglue.
Nico
--
_______________________________________________
krbdev mailing list krbdev@mit.edu
https://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/krbdev
