[jcifs] Re: SPNEGO NTLM/Kerberos

Michael B Allen mba2000 at ioplex.com
Wed Jun 2 06:26:24 GMT 2004

Christopher R. Hertel said:
> Michael B Allen wrote:
> :
>> Well so far we don't have any such dependencies. Presumably if we did
>> kerberos or similar and you didn't have some require library, the client
>> would still function provided you didn't use that functionality.
> I guess I'm concerned about things like that, like a DCE/RPC framework,
> etc.
> If jCIFS will work without those (obviously, without the associated
> functionality, as you say) then my conscience is clear.  :)

Actually for RPC I'm thinking we can use very straight forward inline
stubs  without Jarapac [1]. After some dialog with tridge he claims my idl
compiler will not do what I claim. I'm quite certain he's mistaken but he
does have more experience so I have to acknowledge that.

[1] or replace the NDR code in Jarapac (which is broken) with inline stubs
and then re-jar classes from Jarapac into the jCIFS distribution. The
point being we don't really need much of the Jarapac code for SMB

>> The real obsticle for embedded systems is that the embedded VM is much
>> more limited. In particular there is no i18n conversion IIRC. That's not
>> too hard to fix but what it really boils down to is there's no interest.
>> Would you rather we work on RPC and SPNEGO or some feature nobody has
>> even
>> asked about?
> The features no one has asked about are the ones that have the greatest
> potential win.  No one was asking about CIFS in Java when I started
> writhing that initial bit of kludge-code.

Well it was on The List at one point. But I looked around for info on Suns
website and drew a blank. So it's their fault :)

> We have, however, had people ask about embedded jCIFS.  Someone even
> ported jCIFS to the TINI board back 'round 0.6.x.  (...or was it 0.4.x?)

I think that was one of those projects where they make an announcement and
you never hear about it again.


More information about the jcifs mailing list