Date: Wed, 21 Sep 2011 02:25:41 +0400 From: Lev Serebryakov <lev@FreeBSD.org> To: =?utf-8?Q?Dag-Erling_Sm=C3=B8rgrav?= <des@des.no> Cc: freebsd-security@freebsd.org, d@delphij.net Subject: Re: PAM modules Message-ID: <1251419684.20110921022541@serebryakov.spb.ru> In-Reply-To: <86ty86zzcg.fsf@ds4.des.no> References: <86boukbk8s.fsf@ds4.des.no> <4E738794.4050908@delphij.net> <86zki1afto.fsf@ds4.des.no> <4E78EA46.2080806@delphij.net> <86ty86zzcg.fsf@ds4.des.no>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hello, Dag-Erling. You wrote 21 =D1=81=D0=B5=D0=BD=D1=82=D1=8F=D0=B1=D1=80=D1=8F 2011 =D0=B3.,= 1:19:11: > Yes, you have a point. So you're saying: > - client side only (for nss_ldap, pam_ldap etc) > - namespace hacks to avoid colliding with the port > right? I would definitely support that. Maybe, BSD implementation, based on asn.1 to C compiler from Lev Walkin (http://lionet.info/asn1c/blog/)? ;-) Client-only part doesn't look very hard to implement, when all boilerplate code (packing/unpacking/network processing, etc) is auto-generated from RFCs. --=20 // Black Lion AKA Lev Serebryakov <lev@FreeBSD.org>
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?1251419684.20110921022541>