[AFS3-std] rxgk-afs: moving SetCallBackKey to a separate document?

[Matt W. Benjamin]

Hi Jeff,

I respect your viewpoints on this, and they justify your positions.  Still,
the fact that rxgk enabled a host of features not possible with rxk5, meant
that there would always be a reason to continue the effort.

Regards,

Matt

----- "Jeffrey Hutzelman" <jhutz@cmu.edu> wrote:

> 
> False.  rxk5 was never integrated, and by that I don't mean merely
> that
> the code doesn't appear in the OpenAFS mainline, but that the sort of
> integration work we're doing _right now_ to define how things are
> supposed to interoperate and how a non-flag-day transition works were
> never done.  For most sites, the notion that one has to upgrade every
> server in the entire cell before beginning to do any testing to see
> if
> the new code is desirable is a total non-starter.  There was also
> nothing like standardization work or even a public development
> process;
> I don't recall reading or being involved in any sort of design
> discussion.
> 
> And no, since securing callbacks does not depend on rxgk, that was
> not
> the reason for waiting.  Personally, my reason for not wanting to
> adopt
> rxk5 in 2007, other than the ones I already mentioned, was that doing
> so
> looked very likely to insure that rxgk would _never_ happen.  And in
> fact, it was my opinion at the time that deploying rxk5 and never
> getting rxgk out the door was in fact worse than deploying nothing.
> 
> 
> -- Jeff
> 

-- 
Matt Benjamin
The Linux Box
206 South Fifth Ave. Suite 150
Ann Arbor, MI  48104

http://linuxbox.com

tel.  734-761-4689 
fax.  734-769-8938 
cel.  734-216-5309