Re: KDC model and atomicity

I think the concrete proposal is that 1) we not define any statistics in the model.  2) We define a locked flag.  3) We define a read and a reset operation for it.

Fuzzier:  We also define some kind of rate-limit as an optional alternative to the locked flag?

Maybe a sentence or two summarizing this discussion and why we left the statistics data out?

On Jun 15, 2012, at 12:58 AM, Leif Johansson wrote:

> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
> 
> Interesting discussion. I'm not sure where this leaves us though.
> 
> Does anyone have text or at least a semi-concrete proposal?
> 
> 	MVH leifj
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)
> Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/
> 
> iEYEARECAAYFAk/a60AACgkQ8Jx8FtbMZnfR8wCeLX9g9ewfkJKAcEsvVeUqDTlx
> QAYAnRre4kMqCbfHbG6WN3gVet70T+iu
> =l1/s
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
> _______________________________________________
> ietf-krb-wg mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.anl.gov/mailman/listinfo/ietf-krb-wg

------------------------------------------------------
The opinions expressed in this message are mine,
not those of Caltech, JPL, NASA, or the US Government.
[email protected], or [email protected]

_______________________________________________
ietf-krb-wg mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.anl.gov/mailman/listinfo/ietf-krb-wg