Re: Add support infrastructure for Named Pipe

Steve French wrote:

> I agree that Likewise librpc would address some of this,
> but haven't seen any progress in getting likewise into other distros
> directly (or indirectly by moving it's librpc into samba).  Any 
> progress on getting this into more major distros?

My understanding is that Ubuntu will be moving to 5.3 in Karmic+1.
We're working on the Likewiee 4.x to 5.x package upgrade issues now.
I believe that packages for openSUSE and Fedora are being prepared
currently (wuth the intent of pushing them to the distro upstream
for inclusion) but I'm not on that detail anymore so I don't
an ETA.

> IPC to Winbind or to Likewise daemon for credentials (once) is fine,
> although it would be better IMO to cache credentials using Dave
> Howell's existing kernel mechanism for caching keys.

We each have our own issues to solve.  I need a generic way for
all applications to use gss-ntlm without having to require kernel
upgrades on Linux and on non-linux platforms.  I understand
you point, but I'll concede that that reusing an existing kernel
interface for creds is not as important in my mind (at the
moment) as a standard interface that is widely available cross
platform.

> I have seen examples where the redundant session setups etc. does make
> a difference (server to server migration moves a lot of rpc traffic,
> and using an existing session can cut the traffic by more than 1/2).
> Certainly the load on Samba server (in particular) by running
> extra processes per client can be significant when multiplied
> across many clients to same server.

Yeah.  I agree about connection caching.  I was sayiong that I don't
believe I.O through on named pipes to be a real issue.   But if
someone has a real world example where I/O on a named pipe is a deal
killer, I'll happily reconsider.

But back to the issue at hand, I was only pointing out that a
user space named pipe client library exists in various forms.
Neither Samba nor Likewise are alone in this regard, and a new
client implementation is not hard to write.

What I've not really heard here, which I think is what Jeff is
trying to get answered, is why a user space client lib implementation
(that does connection caching) is not acceptable for Shirish's
use case.




cheers, jerry
-- 
=====================================================================
http://www.plainjoe.org/
"What man is a man who does not make the world better?"      --Balian

_______________________________________________
linux-cifs-client mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-cifs-client

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFK3MCgIR7qMdg1EfYRAjm2AJ9NLqC2w3vO0OSUovrymRTIttuoUwCfesGI
M76FnK0e1BUS9MqoHd/LYxc=
=XC51
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----