Perry E. Metzger writes:
> 
[...]
> 
> 2) Domestic is worthless anyway. Who wants 1DES based Kerb IV anyway?
> 
> Perry

So why is this "broken" implementation still in the tree then?  It
claims to be "supported", but doesn't appear to work except with a
couple clients.  The kerberos samples in inetd.conf show '-k' options
to both rshd and rlogind that don't exist, and I haven't been able
to get telnetd to do anything with kerberos.

All in all, it seems like it doesn't work, and I haven't heard anyone
refuting the claims that it is "worthless."  

Is anyone working on Kerberos 5 packages?

-Andrew
-- 
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Andrew Gillham                            | This space left blank
gillham@whirlpool.com                     | inadvertently.
I speak for myself, not for my employer.  | Contact the publisher.