* [9fans] p9any negotiation
@ 2003-01-24 8:47 Nigel Roles
2003-01-24 13:16 ` David Presotto
2003-01-24 16:43 ` Russ Cox
0 siblings, 2 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: Nigel Roles @ 2003-01-24 8:47 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: 9fans
As far as I can see, factotum will only negotiate for p9sk1.
So, when using srv(4), the only acceptable authentication
protocol is p9sk1.
Is there a reason for this?
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* Re: [9fans] p9any negotiation
2003-01-24 8:47 [9fans] p9any negotiation Nigel Roles
@ 2003-01-24 13:16 ` David Presotto
2003-01-24 16:43 ` Russ Cox
1 sibling, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: David Presotto @ 2003-01-24 13:16 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: 9fans
Would you like factotum to take a list of acceptable protos to negotiate
for?
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* Re: [9fans] p9any negotiation
2003-01-24 8:47 [9fans] p9any negotiation Nigel Roles
2003-01-24 13:16 ` David Presotto
@ 2003-01-24 16:43 ` Russ Cox
1 sibling, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: Russ Cox @ 2003-01-24 16:43 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: 9fans
What else did you have in mind?
p9sk1 is the only protocol we have that
authenticates both sides of the connection.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2003-01-24 16:43 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2003-01-24 8:47 [9fans] p9any negotiation Nigel Roles
2003-01-24 13:16 ` David Presotto
2003-01-24 16:43 ` Russ Cox
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).