[27695] in Kerberos
Re: confusion in ank.
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Vipin Rathor)
Mon Apr 23 10:15:25 2007
Message-ID: <33ab2aef0704230714i7667e209p66ed03fbad1937ba@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2007 19:44:59 +0530
From: "Vipin Rathor" <v.rathor@gmail.com>
To: "Russ Allbery" <rra@stanford.edu>
In-Reply-To: <877isc6yl0.fsf@windlord.stanford.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Disposition: inline
Cc: kerberos@mit.edu
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Errors-To: kerberos-bounces@mit.edu
hi all,
>> My questions:
>> 1. Is this an expected behavior?
>> 2. Is this happening because of '-randkey'? (since not specifying
-randkey
>> gave proper Password expiration date.)
>It probably is happening because of -randkey, although I think that's a
>bug.
If Russ thinks that it's a bug, can somebody please tell me that what should
be the
correct behavior? and Where can I get this(in RFC...I guess???)
>-randkey is implemented under the hood by creating a disabled account with
>a fixed password, changing its password to a random password, and then
>enabling the account. I bet that the password expiration is applied to
>the initial account creation and then cleared immediately by the password
>change to the random password.
>(This is why, when you create an account with -randkey, it immediately
>ends up with a kvno of 2 instead of 1.)
Is it okey to for a random key principal to have a kvno 2 for nothing?(or is
there something
to do with this?)
Russ, thanks for reply. I really appreciete that.
Regards,
Rathor
________________________________________________
Kerberos mailing list Kerberos@mit.edu
https://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/kerberos
