Paul Blackburn wrote: > > One of the key features of AFS which is really important to me > as a site AFS administrator is its reliability. > > In about five years experience (AFS on AIX), I have seen few > glitches with AFS sometimes introduced with new releases but these > have been sorted out pretty quickly. Most "AFS problems" I have dealt > with are really network outages or mis-configuration issues. > > AFS software seems to have become more "solid and robust" over time. One would hope that this is true of all software. (If there's a product for which it isn't true, I would hope you would punt the vendor!) > > >From my point of view, encryption would appear to be the least > asked for capability. Posit: more users want reliability and performance. > > Encryption? There are many ways to do that already. > Also, if encryption is your top issue, disconnect from the net > and get into your Faraday cage. > > So (to Transarc), yes, do look to new capabilities (encryption, > Episode, alternative authentication) but, whatever new stuff > you bring in, please please don't degrade the excellence of AFS. I think this discussion is being rehashed because the information in the paper, http://http.cs.berkeley.edu/~gauthier/endpoint-security.html is still relevant. As a matter of fact, new options were introduced into the DFS spec with version 1.2. (Don't know if any of the vendors will deliver them, however). BTW, there's a widely used Systems Management Framework that suffers from similar problems. It flaunts its use of encryption, when in fact there is no authentication of the data payload in a majority of the cases. -- Chris Cowan [EMAIL PROTECTED] 512-342-3635 (always) 614-677-3784 (until 6/1/98)
begin: vcard fn: Chris Cowan n: Cowan;Chris org: PSW Technologies, BSS adr;dom: 6300 Bridgepoint Pkwy;;Bldg 3, Suite 200;Austin;TX;78730; email;internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED] title: Senior Software Engineer tel;work: 512-342-3635 tel;fax: 512-345-4976 x-mozilla-cpt: ;0 x-mozilla-html: FALSE version: 2.1 end: vcard
