[16045] in Kerberos_V5_Development
Re: Windows future
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Sam Hartman)
Thu Aug 12 08:54:31 2010
From: Sam Hartman <hartmans@painless-security.com>
To: Derrick Brashear <shadow@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2010 08:54:13 -0400
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTikHD2irT_reqQ2G-qmPxnXzq0+ovrnxu-mMmpiO@mail.gmail.com>
(Derrick Brashear's message of "Wed, 11 Aug 2010 23:25:52 -0400")
Message-ID: <tsld3tovvnu.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
>>>>> "Derrick" == Derrick Brashear <shadow@gmail.com> writes:
>> Although there are many institutions for whom KfW and NIM are
>> very important, no one thus far has stepped forward, either as an
>> organization or as an individual, and said that they feel
>> strongly enough about either to enable the work required to
>> continue to make this a viable platform.
Derrick> The releases available at
Derrick> http://www.secure-endpoints.com/#kfw (and, notably, not
Derrick> from MIT) suggest otherwise. Do you have additional details
Derrick> you can share which suggest otherwise?
Certainly A lot of people find KFW 3.2.2 useful. I think the
interesting question is whether anyone is willing to put money or their
own time behind updating KFW to a more recent version of the core
Kerberos libraries.
I think there's an assumption in my mind and probably the mind of a lot
of people here that without updates to the core libraries that code base
will eventually bit-rot.
--Sam
_______________________________________________
krbdev mailing list krbdev@mit.edu
https://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/krbdev
