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

[Benjamin Kaduk]

On Sat, 2 Mar 2013, Jeffrey Hutzelman wrote:

>
> On Sat, 2013-03-02 at 08:47 +0000, Simon Wilkinson wrote:
>
>> I'm quite happy to contribute language that describes what YFS is doing
>> now for callback protection, but I will note (as mentioned above) that
>> it does require changes outside of just the SetCallbackKey RPC. So, if
>> we are to consider it, it needs to be considered as part of the main
>> rxgk-afs document.
>
> Why don't you start by just telling us what you're doing, in broad
> terms?  Some people feel differently, but personally, I don't think an
> I-D or a formal specification is required to get an idea across for
> discussion.  If you do that, start a new thread, please?

I'm in a similar position as jhutz; I think I understand what the callback 
protection mechanism should look like, and it doesn't involve protocol 
level changes outside of SetCallBackKey.  (I think it looks very similar 
to jhutz's idea.)  Possibly because I think I know 
what it should look like, I'm having a hard time imaginging what changes 
outside of SetCallBackKey could be made, so a general sense of what you're 
doing would be greatly appreciated.

-Ben