in the case of the mit cells, we wanted to have multiple cells under one
kerberos realm...it was easier to manage a single realm, rather than a
realm for each cell.
cheers,
anne
Derrick J Brashear wrote:
You mean like say a krb5 realm named ATHENA.MIT.EDU supporting a cell
named sipb.mit.edu? Sure. Go nuts.
On Thu, 15 Feb 2007, John W. Sopko Jr. wrote:
Is there any good reason(s) for NOT deploying a
Kerberos REALM name that is different from the
AFS cell name. When we move to a K5 server I may
have to use a different REALM name on the db/file servers.
I want to be sure this will not be a problem in the future.
I have tested different realm/cell names and it works now.
I would prefer to have my cell name and realm name match as
it does now and I know that is the recommendation. For
political reasons I may not have that luxury when moving
to K5 authentication.
Thanks for your input.
--
John W. Sopko Jr. University of North Carolina
email: sopko AT cs.unc.edu Computer Science Dept., CB 3175
Phone: 919-962-1844 Sitterson Hall; Room 044
Fax: 919-962-1799 Chapel Hill, NC 27599-3175
_______________________________________________
OpenAFS-info mailing list
OpenAFS-info@openafs.org
https://lists.openafs.org/mailman/listinfo/openafs-info
_______________________________________________
OpenAFS-info mailing list
OpenAFS-info@openafs.org
https://lists.openafs.org/mailman/listinfo/openafs-info
_______________________________________________
OpenAFS-info mailing list
OpenAFS-info@openafs.org
https://lists.openafs.org/mailman/listinfo/openafs-info
