[16102] in Kerberos_V5_Development
Re: Adding Fortuna as a new prng
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Sam Hartman)
Sat Aug 21 08:25:53 2010
From: Sam Hartman <hartmans@mit.edu>
To: Nicolas Williams <Nicolas.Williams@oracle.com>
Date: Sat, 21 Aug 2010 08:25:39 -0400
In-Reply-To: <20100821003357.GN17097@oracle.com> (Nicolas Williams's message
of "Fri, 20 Aug 2010 19:33:57 -0500")
Message-ID: <tsleids8858.fsf@mit.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Cc: Russ Allbery <rra@stanford.edu>, krbdev@mit.edu
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Errors-To: krbdev-bounces@mit.edu
>>>>> "Nicolas" == Nicolas Williams <Nicolas.Williams@oracle.com> writes:
Nicolas> On Fri, Aug 20, 2010 at 05:26:14PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
>> Anyway, I think the deciding factor here is not so much the theoretical
>> argument about how this might play out, but the practical argument that
>> some of the consumers of MIT Kerberos are probably not going to be happy
>> with a simple public domain dedication, and I think we're in agreement
>> there.
Nicolas> I can't speak for Oracle, but that's the sort of thing that makes you
Nicolas> want pluggable (at least build-time pluggable) interfaces, so that you
Nicolas> can choose which modules to distribute.
I'd agree with that if there were not one option that worked for a vast
majority of users.
If there is, why the complexity?
_______________________________________________
krbdev mailing list krbdev@mit.edu
https://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/krbdev
