From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Message-ID: To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu Subject: Re: [9fans] the meaning of group From: Charles Forsyth Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2008 23:06:35 +0000 In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Topicbox-Message-UUID: 3c51902e-ead3-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025 > without any agreed-upon or secure arbiter of groups which tracks centralized > information, this does not seem like a good idea to me. `centralised' information? > in your case, however, a simple scheme might have the kernel (or just a device) accept a ctl request that added > or removed a user name from a local group table, and then system start up script(s) would load the table from some agreed source > (and presumably one that's adequately reliable). i think something like that was mentioned, i assume you'd have to be hostowner to load it, so it's up to the host-owner process that loads it what it regards as `adequately reliable' data. on a cpu server, it can be consistent with the user names associated with processes on that system. that's not centralised though: it's a local convention.