Quoting Jeffrey Altman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
Derek Atkins wrote:
Quoting Jim Rees <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
My personal feeling is that I'd prefer to get callbacks, rather than
have to wait 10 minutes to find out that files I'm using have changed.
Also, the fact that it requires a 1.4.1 server means that most of the
servers I contact (which I do not control) are not going to have this patch
for a while.. So, I'd like to see a client-side "throw extra network
usage at the problem" patch in place.
-derek
The older servers that do not track clients by address and port but
only by address are going to have many other problems when dealing with
NAT'd clients. Bombarding the servers with probes from multiple clients
behind a NAT may result in adverse consequences on the server that you
and the administrator are not prepared to deal with.
True, but a) that assumes multiple clients behind a NAT (which isn't always
the case), and b) server support to track by port was added a while ago,
even if there are still bugs in it.
Jeffrey Altman
-derek
--
Derek Atkins, SB '93 MIT EE, SM '95 MIT Media Laboratory
Member, MIT Student Information Processing Board (SIPB)
URL: http://web.mit.edu/warlord/ PP-ASEL-IA N1NWH
[EMAIL PROTECTED] PGP key available
_______________________________________________
OpenAFS-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.openafs.org/mailman/listinfo/openafs-devel
