Change in K4 ticket cache format

Alejandro R. Sedeno asedeno at MIT.EDU
Tue Oct 18 20:38:05 EDT 2005

On Tue, 2005-10-18 at 15:41 -0400, Jeffrey Hutzelman wrote:
> By all means, if you can come up with an alignment record that works for 
> MSB-first platforms, use it (and tell me what it is, so I can update my 
> heimdal patches).  If not, well, don't let that prevent you from finishing 
> the work as it applies to LSB-first systems.  In this case, I think an 
> improvement for only some platforms is much better than none at all.
> -- Jeff

I've been thinking about this, and my first thought is to duplicate the
32 bit issue_date as the first half of the alignment record. Problems
arise since the name in the alignment record vary by time. Actually,
it's worse since once every 6 months or so, there'll be a second where
name, instance, and realm will all be null. All I can think of so far is
to have six different alignment records, dependant on the issue_date of
the previous ticket, which means the ticket would have to be identified
by something other than principal, and testing for them becomes more
complicated, though not horrible.

Is that about where you were when you were thinking about this earlier,
and would that be getting to complicated? I'll think about this more

I'm in Remdond this week, and the apartment I'm in won't have net until
tomorrow, so I haven't gotten to testing or final tweaks.


More information about the krbdev mailing list