On Thu, Jan 15, 2009 at 03:11:46PM -0700, Shawn M. Emery wrote: > Nicolas Williams wrote: > >On Thu, Jan 15, 2009 at 02:57:13PM -0700, Shawn M. Emery wrote: > >>Two are being considered for OpenSolaris, so within each OS there could > > > >Why? For interop with MIT krb5 user-land built by users? If MIT krb5 > >received contributions from us that #ifdef solaris the choice of IPC > >then this problem goes away. > > I was considering an all or nothing approach, rather than using > different IPC for kernel/user space.
I'm in favor of using only doors for upcalls and user-land calls unless there's a need to interop with previous installations of user-built MIT krb5 CCAPI clients. > >>be options or accross multiple OS's. In any case, I am loath to > >>mix-and-match IPCs across kernel and user space as we prevent code reuse > >>and the inherit benefits that it provides (simplicity, risk, etc.). > >> > > > >Yes, me too. So why must we have two? > > > > I was really wanting to change the gssd IPC and thought doors was a good > mechanism for handling this. What are your arguments for not using > doors in this case? I'm not arguing that you not use doors. Quite the contrary.
