Projects/domain realm referrals - Revision history

TomYu at 04:13, 16 February 2010

2010-02-16T04:13:27Z

2009-08-25T20:21:50Z

2009-01-07T20:07:03Z

2008-12-29T17:50:38Z

propose new test

2008-12-29T17:44:57Z

‎Approvals

2008-07-23T20:53:41Z

‎Open Issues: change name to "notes" and drop default service name list idea

2008-07-18T16:23:33Z

‎Open Issues

2008-07-03T20:21:13Z

‎Open Issues: note the lack of caching

2008-07-03T20:17:33Z

‎Discussion

2008-07-03T20:05:55Z

revise review date

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:50, 29 December 2008
Line 56:		Line 56:

	Manual test of unknown name that maps to the local realm.		Manual test of unknown name that maps to the local realm.
		+
		+
		+	Test a case involving at least one intermediate realm (referral from a through b to c) where the realm names do not follow the hierarchy; that is where the client would not have chosen any path components on its own. We have some complaints that this does not work on the client side.

	== Notes ==		== Notes ==

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:44, 29 December 2008
Line 74:		Line 74:

	===Approvals===		===Approvals===
		+
		+	#[[User:SamHartman\|SamHartman]] 12:44, 29 December 2008 (EST)

	===Discussion===		===Discussion===

@@ Line 57: / Line 57: @@
 Manual test of unknown name that maps to the local realm.
-== Open Issues ==
+== Notes ==
 Caching the lists of service names isn't in the plan; that can be added later if there's a performance concern.

@@ Line 59: / Line 59: @@
 == Open Issues ==
-Should all services to process this way when NT-UNKNOWN is used be specified in the config file, or should we start with the hardcoded list in the 524 name conversion code and add from there?  (The exception list could still override, but wouldn't distinguish between NT-UNKNOWN and NT-SRV-HST.)
+Should all services to process this way when NT-UNKNOWN is used be specified in the config file, or should we start with the hardcoded list in the 524 name conversion code and add from there?  (The exception list could still override, but wouldn't distinguish between NT-UNKNOWN and NT-SRV-HST.)  Probably default to an empty list.
 Caching the lists of service names isn't in the plan; that can be added later if there's a performance concern.

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:21, 3 July 2008
Line 60:		Line 60:

	Should all services to process this way when NT-UNKNOWN is used be specified in the config file, or should we start with the hardcoded list in the 524 name conversion code and add from there? (The exception list could still override, but wouldn't distinguish between NT-UNKNOWN and NT-SRV-HST.)		Should all services to process this way when NT-UNKNOWN is used be specified in the config file, or should we start with the hardcoded list in the 524 name conversion code and add from there? (The exception list could still override, but wouldn't distinguish between NT-UNKNOWN and NT-SRV-HST.)
		+
		+	Caching the lists of service names isn't in the plan; that can be added later if there's a performance concern.

	==Review==		==Review==

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:17, 3 July 2008
Line 79:		Line 79:
	I believe that name type needs to be considered and that Jeff Hutzelman's proposal on krbdev should be adopted.; this is not quite a blocking objection but I'd appreciate explicit closure before you go forward with another option.		I believe that name type needs to be considered and that Jeff Hutzelman's proposal on krbdev should be adopted.; this is not quite a blocking objection but I'd appreciate explicit closure before you go forward with another option.
	--[[User:SamHartman\|SamHartman]] 13:45, 10 May 2008 (EDT)		--[[User:SamHartman\|SamHartman]] 13:45, 10 May 2008 (EDT)
		+
		+	: I think today's new version should address Jeff's comments. Posting a new message asking for review.... --[[User:KenRaeburn\|KenRaeburn]] 16:17, 3 July 2008 (EDT)