On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 12:36 PM, Benjamin Kaduk <kaduk(_at_)mit(_dot_)edu>
wrote:
In combination with Tom's proposed changes, this table should work well.
I agree.
Agreed that some text about what qop 0 means is needed.
I yes. Indeed, maybe we should even remove the qop column and state
that we always use qop 0 unless otherwise stated (and we'll not state
otherwise).
KITTEN WG should undertake an extension to replace the broken qop concept.
I worry that such an undertaking would degenerate into a full GSS-API
rewrite, but regardless that's out of scope for the current discussion.
I don't think so. We've discussed it [since] on IRC, and it's not
relevant here so I'll not burden the cc'ed with it. I'll bring
something to KITTEN WG about this *after* the interim meeting that's
coming up, but NFSv4 WG should not wait for it.
Nico
--