Query on kpasswd and kadmin ?

[Smith, Matt]

  Would the "standardized solution" be based on/compatible with RFC
3244, or completely new?
  Out of curiosity, is there any shortcoming with the protocol
documented in RFC 3244? Or is this a legal issue?

Thanks,
-Matt

On Mon, 2007-03-05 at 21:11 -0500, Sam Hartman wrote:
> >>>>> "Smith," == Smith, Matt <matt.smith at uconn.edu> writes:
> 
>     Smith,> Are there plans to "upgrade" kpasswd to RFC 3244?  -Matt
> 
> RFC 3244 is a microsoft proprietary protocol.  We do sort of have
> support for that in the library, but we're very uncomfortable
> enhancing that support without first implementing some standardized
> solution.
> 
> 
> --Sam
-- 
Matthew J. Smith <matt.smith at uconn.edu>
University of Connecticut UITS
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : http://mailman.mit.edu/pipermail/krbdev/attachments/20070306/29442d96/attachment.bin