At 4:43 PM -0800 3/29/98, Jonathan S. Shapiro wrote:
>I am pondering what I *think* is a small design change. It is
>motivated by a porting issue: what to do when porting programs that
>don't expect their open descriptors to go away on them.
>
>I am wondering if instead of converting a rescinded key to DK(0), it
>wouldn't be useful to have a distinguished void key. The effect of
>invoking a void key is that the invoker takes an exception that is
>delivered to the domain keeper.
>
>I haven't pondered this one seriously yet, and have no immediate plans
>w.r.t. this idea, but I'm interested in reactions.
Many of the KeyKOS designers would have a specific rescinded key type if we had it to do over. The question I would like to ask Norm and Charlie is, should there only be one rescinded key, or could it include some information about the no-longer valid key (e.g. the discrim type)?
Bill Frantz | If hate must be my prison | Periwinkle -- Consulting (408)356-8506 | lock, then love must be | 16345 Englewood Ave. frantz@netcom.com | the key. - Phil Ochs | Los Gatos, CA 95032, USA