From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Message-Id: <200703251156.l2PBujR12676@zamenhof.cs.utwente.nl>
To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@cse.psu.edu>
Subject: Re: [9fans] factotum/802.1x catch 22?
In-reply-to: Your message of "Thu, 22 Mar 2007 06:38:11 +0200."
	<9321241f7154cd4cd7fab6579c8916b0@proxima.alt.za> 
References: <9321241f7154cd4cd7fab6579c8916b0@proxima.alt.za> 
From: Axel Belinfante <Axel.Belinfante@cs.utwente.nl>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <12672.1174823805.1@zamenhof.cs.utwente.nl.cs.utwente.nl>
Date: Sun, 25 Mar 2007 13:56:45 +0200
Topicbox-Message-UUID: 30b2ebb0-ead2-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025

> > reseiving it it will also trigger an attempt to access
> > secstore if it wanted to do that on startup but couldn't
> > (like because there was no network configured yet.)
> 
> That is also a useful function in itself and I see no risks in it.
> If you add it in as a separate function, make sure we can add the
> location of the secstore.

I'm a bit unsure what is best regarding secstore;
I hesitate to replicate functionality we alread have,
and we already have the possibility of doing:

  auth/secstore -G factotum | read -m >/mnt/factotum/ctl


what you say seems to imply 'copying' (functionality of)
secstore(1) flags, like '-s server'.
but then, where to stop?
do we also need something like -g/-G for the filename?
that would allow e.g.

   echo secstore -s server -G filename >/mnt/factotum/ctl

but then, what about e.g. -n?
the more I think about it, the less certain I become.


It was suggested to me off-list to use a shell script
as boot program for more flexibility. in that case
doing the auth/secstore + read  to deal with secstore
would be trivial.

> Mind you, that might be necessary in the
> "authaddr" command, too, possibly as an option.


Axel.