Does anyone know if MIT kerberos is a drop-in replacement for Heimdal? It seems more actively developed and more featureful than Heimdal these days. I'm pretty sure cryptographic export as munitions is no longer an issue for the US. Perhaps it would even make sense to try to transition to MIT? --Kaiting. -- Kiwis and Limes: http://kaitocracy.blogspot.com/
On 19/11/10 22:29, Kaiting Chen wrote:
Does anyone know if MIT kerberos is a drop-in replacement for Heimdal? It seems more actively developed and more featureful than Heimdal these days. I'm pretty sure cryptographic export as munitions is no longer an issue for the US. Perhaps it would even make sense to try to transition to MIT?
Does the current samba (3.x) even build with MIT kerberos? I am fairly definite that samba4 does not... Allan
Does the current samba (3.x) even build with MIT kerberos? I am fairly definite that samba4 does not...
I believe Samba 3 does but Samba 4 does not. Apparently Samba 4 includes OpenLDAP and Heimdal internally. Which is kind of stupid when you consider that people are running FedoraDS, ApacheDS, NDS, MIT Keberos, Shishi, etc. these days. --Kaiting. -- Kiwis and Limes: http://kaitocracy.blogspot.com/
I would be also for inclusion of MIT krb5. And about samba, at least from my experiences from RHEL6 (where we use krb1.8.3), there is client part of samba4 and server samba3.something.... Zbyshek On 19.11.2010 13:56, Allan McRae wrote:
On 19/11/10 22:29, Kaiting Chen wrote:
Does anyone know if MIT kerberos is a drop-in replacement for Heimdal? It seems more actively developed and more featureful than Heimdal these days. I'm pretty sure cryptographic export as munitions is no longer an issue for the US. Perhaps it would even make sense to try to transition to MIT?
Does the current samba (3.x) even build with MIT kerberos? I am fairly definite that samba4 does not...
Allan
participants (3)
-
Allan McRae
-
Kaiting Chen
-
Zbysek MRAZ