Summary of standard Kerberos service names
hartmans at MIT.EDU
Sun Feb 29 01:02:27 EST 2004
>>>>> "Jeffrey" == Jeffrey Altman <jaltman at columbia.edu> writes:
Jeffrey> John Hascall wrote:
>> Or, are we just wishing V4 goes away... :)
Jeffrey> I'm wishing V4 goes away. I think we should do
Jeffrey> everything possible to make that happen.
I think this is close to MIT's official position. We are not doing
any new development on krb4 except to remove imp/implementations of
krb4. That means you should expect us to do work to remove KFW's
implementation of krb4 in favor of the one in the krb5 tree, just as
we did for KFM. Some day you may see us do development to remove that
implementation of krb4. I hope for that day.
We are still supporting krb4 in terms of maintinance. We don't want
to make it easier to use; we don't want better krb4 integration. But
we do want to fix problems especially security problems.
I don't know we have a position on how much effort we would go to in
order to evaluate external patches that add features or make krb4
easier to use.
More information about the krbdev