Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!gatech!ut-sally!im4u!jsq
From: jsq@im4u.UUCP (John Quarterman)
Newsgroups: net.unix-wizards
Subject: Re: Symbolic user names and RFS
Message-ID: <781@im4u.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 25-Feb-86 16:22:24 EST
Article-I.D.: im4u.781
Posted: Tue Feb 25 16:22:24 1986
Date-Received: Fri, 28-Feb-86 05:37:33 EST
References: <674@oliveb.UUCP> <1246@ubc-ean.UUCP> <759@im4u.UUCP> <591@cheviot.uucp>
Reply-To: jsq@im4u.UUCP (John Quarterman)
Organization: U. Texas CS Dept., Austin, Texas
Lines: 20

In article <591@cheviot.uucp> ncx@cheviot.newcastle.ac.uk (Lindsay F. Marshall) writes:
>In article <759@im4u.UUCP> smoot@im4u.UUCP writes:
>>It seems that it is *imperative* for security reasons to have the same
>>UID/GID ==> username mapping on any systems which share filesystems.
>
>Rubbish!!!!! Why on earth should  I have to support the same mapping as you?

*sigh*  Smoot's too polite to followup to these flames.
So I'll point out a couple of things overlooked by the flamers:

Nobody suggested you should have the same uids as we do.
Nobody recommended that even all of our university adopt
the CS uid standard, nor have we ever expected them to.
The remote filesystem we use at the moment is Sun's NFS,
not RFS (neither of them) nor the Newcastle Connection.

Jumping to conclusions makes for good flames but not good discussions.
-- 
John Quarterman, UUCP:  {gatech,harvard,ihnp4,pyramid,seismo}!ut-sally!im4u!jsq
ARPA Internet and CSNET:  jsq@im4u.UTEXAS.EDU, jsq@sally.UTEXAS.EDU