[OpenAFS] Funding the formation of an OpenAFS Foundation (fwd)

Troy Benjegerdes hozer@hozed.org
Thu, 27 Sep 2012 22:12:26 -0500

> Backward compatibility is a requirement for the entire community.  The
> only criteria that is specific to IBM is that we cannot turn off older
> RPCs for which there already are replacements and we cannot completely
> get rid of rxkad or kaserver from the code base.  There are also some
> implications for the rx transport.

I'll have to respectfully disagree with that.

When I get around to it, I'm going to rip out rxkad, kaserver, and pretty
much any other encryption than AES out of the TFS fork.

I only care about backwards compatability with unauthenticated AFS clients
from other cells right now, until I get a couple of features that I really
believe I need. At some point, I'll probably want compatability again, but
right now my AFS cell is pretty much on life support in the hopes the
community can be revived.
> Any existing cell administrator is going to want backward compatibility.
>  When a file server is upgraded you do not want to have
> to upgrade clients that you do not control and you do not want clients
> newer than your file server to experience data access problems.  Cell
> administrators still want the ability to run with mixed versions of file
> servers without a flag day.
> The primary impediment to moving forward is a lack of community funded
> development resources.  There are very few tasks left which can be
> accomplished in just a week or two and the on-going maintenance expenses
> are substantial.

And we are in a circular dependency.. we can't move forward because of 
lack of funding, and the compelling features that would attract new users
and new funding are blocked because of the cost of doing new features and
being compatible with old clients.

How do we break this, and get some new users and new funding?