FW: RPC restructuring finished (mostly).

[Jeremy Allison]

Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote:
> 
> jeremy,
> 
> remember that this work was performed over two years ago, and it wasn't
> you that carried out the split of interface and implementation parts.
> i'll do a follow-up, hope you don't mind.

No I know the original split was done by you in tng (although I don't
think it was two years ago, more like one), this is a similar
split finally being done to the Samba code.


> which means that sun cascade will fail to work against samba, because
> samba will incorrectly unmarshall the sec-desc (etc) - due to
> receiver-makes-right rules.

I think this actually works. I'm working with Sun to confirm this.

> hope this helps.
> 
> also, the reason that we didn't use talloc is because there are possible
> circumstances in which the destruction of memory at the end of the rpc
> marshalling will cause memory corruption.
> 
> remember, dce/rpc can pass memory structures over-the-wire that can be
> used beyond the scope of one single dce/rpc function call, at both client
> end and server end.
> 
> so, fragile or not, memory leaks are better than freeing memory and still
> using it!

I've been catching these issues with insure, and I
then copy the relevent structures out of the talloc'ed
areas before storage. There are less of these than you
might think - and memory leaks are not acceptible in a
long lived daemon.

Cheers,

	Jeremy.

-- 
--------------------------------------------------------
Buying an operating system without source is like buying
a self-assembly Space Shuttle with no instructions.
--------------------------------------------------------