[OpenAFS] Re: [OpenAFS-devel] rxgk development has been funded

[Troy Benjegerdes]

[snip]

> As mentioned above, any "commitment" made at the present time may
> not be relevant in a year's time.  What I am able to do will depend
> on how much time I have available, what pieces are contributed by
> the community, and what features are needed by MIT and the community
> as a whole.  We plan to prioritize having a functional
> implementation that allows the use of GSSAPI with Kerberos 5 as a
> mechanism and AES256 as the key type, but other functionality will
> be implemented as time permits.  If some organization or individual
> were to, say, remove LWP dependencies from the source tree in favor
> of pthreads, then I would have more time to spend on new features
> such as you list here.


What are the roadblocks to standardizing an 'rxk5' transport that supports
any encryption mechanism(s) of the underlying kerberos implementation, but
does *not* use GSSAPI?

Obviously this does not provide everything a full GSSAPI implementation 
would, but it would provide some basic functionality.