Status of Kerberos Support across Samba versions

Christopher R. Hertel crh at
Fri May 5 17:28:51 GMT 2000

> "Christopher R. Hertel" wrote:
> > The "license" appears to be designed to prevent an Open Source
> > implementation.  I really have no idea what they are thinking.  
> 	It's is a little off-topic, and rather contentious (;-))

Sorry.  Didn't mean to be contentious.  I meant literally that I'm not
clear on their actual goals and motives but it appears on the surface that
the "license" precludes Open Source implementation since OpenSource by its
very nature would make the information available. 

> > The real question, however, is this:  What do we gain from knowing how
> > these fields are layed out?  They likely contain information specific to
> > W2K.  Samba jumps backwards through flaming hoops as it is trying to
> > generate valid-looking W/NT IDs.
> 	I doubt if it adds a whole lot, as we either need to develop
> 	the information independantly or obtain permission to 
> 	implement from the specification.

Again, I did a poor job of expressing myself.  I meant that adding all of 
the information required to emulate the Windows permissions system is 
already a pain.

> 	I'd be tempted to ask for the latter, as it might 
> 	reflect very much to the credit of Microsoft to
> 	permit such.

Under what terms?  If they were going to give out the specifications, the
resulting code would be released under the GPL, no?  I would think that 
MS would hand that info to the MIT folk first.


Again, the question I'm trying to ask is this:  If the PAC information
were figured out or given out, what would Samba do with it?

Chris -)-----

Christopher R. Hertel -)-----                   University of Minnesota
crh at              Networking and Telecommunications Services

    Ideals are like stars; you will not succeed in touching them
    with your choose them as your guides, and following
    them you will reach your destiny.  --Carl Schultz

More information about the samba-technical mailing list