From owner-freebsd-current Sat Feb 10 18:48:00 1996 Return-Path: owner-current Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) id SAA03173 for current-outgoing; Sat, 10 Feb 1996 18:48:00 -0800 (PST) Received: from rover.village.org (rover.village.org [204.144.255.49]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) with SMTP id SAA03160 for ; Sat, 10 Feb 1996 18:47:39 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by rover.village.org (8.6.11/8.6.6) with SMTP id TAA02717; Sat, 10 Feb 1996 19:47:19 -0700 Message-Id: <199602110247.TAA02717@rover.village.org> To: Paul Traina Subject: Re: Kerberos @ freebsd.org? Cc: current@freebsd.org In-reply-to: Your message of Sat, 10 Feb 1996 18:43:18 PST Date: Sat, 10 Feb 1996 19:47:19 -0700 From: Warner Losh Sender: owner-current@freebsd.org Precedence: bulk -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- : I really don't want to get into a ssh vs kerberos war, we can certainly : run both of them. Rather, I'd just like to point out: :-) : ssh is good for peer-to-peer secure communications : : kerberos is good for intra-organization communications This is a good summary. While you can do inter-organizational communications with kerberos, it is a little painful :-( Warner -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 Comment: Processed by Mailcrypt 3.4, an Emacs/PGP interface iQCVAwUBMR1Yrtxynu/2qPVhAQH1gAP/QV5QZ7jGJ7LqIW3EEWDRKqlAq8QdVx1z Cl7V7W5GiKz5+rsB3PYGJFEdAKbo6DGksZzs5fY4vCwukoUFrgn08lPPg1uxg2UH a+7nJKl8cyrG/+mmIx79rZ0A1nPPGNcOinRwB94mn8Uj5sia+AM2fSWbxZeouqgB 2ZD9ejNKZK4= =c9ro -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----