I don't know why the "." would be a problem for Kerberos but it is
currently a problem for AFS. See the discussion on this list within
the last month.
Karl M. Davis wrote:
> Hello all,
>
>
>
> I have a user whose domain logon name is “ronald.carlsten”. When he
> tries to logon to a computer
Hello all,
I have a user whose domain logon name is "ronald.carlsten". When he tries
to logon to a computer with the AFS and Kerberos clients installed he gets
the error message "Integrated login failed: client not found in Kerberos
database". I have another user "john.holguin" with the same
Dr A V Le Blanc wrote:
On Wed, 22 Aug 2007, Robert Sturrock wrote:
In former times (when Linux was just born), the content of /afs was
delivered by a volume itself (named root.afs). All this volume contained
were mountpoints to root.cell-volumes of other cells. An admin had to
maintain those
Number of keys: 5
Key: vno 30, AES-256 CTS mode with 96-bit SHA-1 HMAC, no salt
Key: vno 30, Triple DES cbc mode with HMAC/sha1, no salt
Key: vno 30, DES cbc mode with CRC-32, no salt
Key: vno 30, DES cbc mode with CRC-32, Version 4
Key: vno 30, DES cbc mode with CRC-32, AFS version 3
-Mike
Jeff
Matt Elliott wrote:
> We just discovered a problem with our KDC now running MIT 1.6.2. When a
> user changes their password (previous keys were created with our old kdc
> version 1.4.3 still work) with patches and then tries klog it longer
> grants tokens. klog returns "Unable to authenticate to
Matt Elliott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> We just discovered a problem with our KDC now running MIT 1.6.2. When a
> user changes their password (previous keys were created with our old kdc
> version 1.4.3 still work) with patches and then tries klog it longer
> grants tokens. klog returns "Unabl
We just discovered a problem with our KDC now running MIT 1.6.2.
When a user changes their password (previous keys were created with
our old kdc version 1.4.3 still work) with patches and then tries
klog it longer grants tokens. klog returns "Unable to authenticate
to AFS because password
On Aug 23, 2007, at 10:49, Kai Moritz wrote:
* slowest: disk cache, of course.
* medium: memory cache
* fastest: ufs filesystem on a lofi-mounted "block device" hosted
in /
tmp (which is in-RAM)
(I know this certainly wastes some cpu/memory resources and
overhead, but... it works
"chas williams - CONTRACTOR" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,"Kai Moritz" writes:
>> I haven't tried that yet, becaus in the file /etc/openafs/afs.conf of
>> my Debian Etch installation there is a comment that says:
>>
>> # Using the memory cache is not recommended.
> * slowest: disk cache, of course.
> * medium: memory cache
> * fastest: ufs filesystem on a lofi-mounted "block device" hosted in /
> tmp (which is in-RAM)
> (I know this certainly wastes some cpu/memory resources and
> overhead, but... it works)
>
That sound intresting!
I will give
> memcache is much faster than the disk cache. memcache will not get any
> better if no one ever uses it so the openafs developers can get some
> bug reports.
That's true, but I cannot annoy my users with starving machines... Hence, I can
only run that on test-machines.
Greetings kai
--
GMX Fr
Kai Moritz wrote:
What are your data rates in MB/s?
scp says: 4.6MB/s
Isn't great either. So may be you have some other problems in your network?
When I do a scp of a 100 MB file to my laptop I get ~ 8 MB/s and there
is in parallel running a remote rsync with about another .7 MB/s in both
memcache is much faster than the disk cache. memcache will not get
any
better if no one ever uses it so the openafs developers can get some
bug reports. i think memcache has improved quite a bit (but it could
be better, i need to submit some patches) over the last couple years.
i use '-memc
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,"Kai Moritz" writes:
>I haven't tried that yet, becaus in the file /etc/openafs/afs.conf of
>my Debian Etch installation there is a comment that says:
>
># Using the memory cache is not recommended. It's less stable than the disk
># cache and doesn't improve performa
> What are your data rates in MB/s?
scp says: 4.6MB/s
> If you are on a fast network (Gbit Ethernet, Inifiband ...) a disk cache
> may be remarkably slower than the network. In this case memory cache can
> help.
I haven't tried that yet, becaus in the file /etc/openafs/afs.conf of
my Debian Etch
On 8/23/07, Dr A V Le Blanc <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Wed, 22 Aug 2007, Robert Sturrock wrote:
> > In former times (when Linux was just born), the content of /afs was
> > delivered by a volume itself (named root.afs). All this volume contained
> > were mountpoints to root.cell-volumes of ot
Kai Moritz wrote:
Hi folks!
I would like to try tuning the speed of my openafs installation, but
the only information I could google is this rather old thread
(http://www.openafs.org/pipermail/openafs-info/2003-June/009753.html)
and the hint to use a big cache-partition.
For comparison I've c
Hi folks!
I would like to try tuning the speed of my openafs installation, but the only
information I could google is this rather old thread
(http://www.openafs.org/pipermail/openafs-info/2003-June/009753.html) and the
hint to use a big cache-partition.
For comparison I've created files with ra
On Wed, 22 Aug 2007, Robert Sturrock wrote:
> In former times (when Linux was just born), the content of /afs was
> delivered by a volume itself (named root.afs). All this volume contained
> were mountpoints to root.cell-volumes of other cells. An admin had to
> maintain those mountpoints so that t
19 matches
Mail list logo
