Proposed modifications to replay cache to prevent false positives

[Henry B. Hotz]

On May 21, 2008, at 12:02 AM, krbdev-request at mit.edu wrote:

> I think part of the intent in this project was to retain backwards
> compatibility with the existing implementation in terms of the on-disk
> format.  (E.g., mixing OS-vendor and MIT binaries without breaking
> things, when the MIT code has Jeff's shiny new replay cache and the  
> OS-
> vendor code is based on a slightly older MIT release.)  I wouldn't see
> a problem with the introduction of a new rcache type that uses a
> different file format, though; it'd let you run the old code until you
> were sure all the implementations on the machine supported the new
> code, and then start using the new stuff.

Is there a real example where this is useful?  I can't, for example,  
imagine multiple web servers on a machine where they didn't all use  
the same build.  (Well, OK, I can imagine that they might run on  
different ports and be optimized differently enough to wind up with  
different kerb libs, but I would treat this as an unsupported corner  
case.  Just make the name convention different enough that they don't  
damage each other.)

------------------------------------------------------
The opinions expressed in this message are mine,
not those of Caltech, JPL, NASA, or the US Government.
Henry.B.Hotz at jpl.nasa.gov, or hbhotz at oxy.edu