Received: from biscayne-one-station.mit.edu (BISCAYNE-ONE-STATION.MIT.EDU [18.7.7.80]) by krbdev.mit.edu (8.9.3p2) with ESMTP id QAA01100; Mon, 25 Sep 2006 16:31:41 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from outgoing.mit.edu (OUTGOING-AUTH.MIT.EDU [18.7.22.103]) by biscayne-one-station.mit.edu (8.13.6/8.9.2) with ESMTP id k8PKVeXP001803 for <rt@krbdev.MIT.EDU>; Mon, 25 Sep 2006 16:31:40 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from cathode-dark-space.mit.edu (CATHODE-DARK-SPACE.MIT.EDU [18.18.1.96]) (authenticated bits=56) (User authenticated as tlyu@ATHENA.MIT.EDU) by outgoing.mit.edu (8.13.6/8.12.4) with ESMTP id k8PKVa3Z010754 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT) for <rt@krbdev.MIT.EDU>; Mon, 25 Sep 2006 16:31:36 -0400 (EDT)
Received: (from tlyu@localhost) by cathode-dark-space.mit.edu (8.12.9) id k8PKVZAH019436; Mon, 25 Sep 2006 16:31:35 -0400 (EDT)
To: rt@krbdev.mit.edu
Subject: Re: [krbdev.mit.edu #4237] SVN Commit
References: <rt-4237-18538.19.3687061272974@krbdev.mit.edu>
From: Tom Yu <tlyu@MIT.EDU>
Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2006 16:31:35 -0400
In-Reply-To: <rt-4237-18538.19.3687061272974@krbdev.mit.edu> (Sam Hartman via's message of "Wed, 6 Sep 2006 00:23:31 -0400 (EDT)")
Message-Id: <ldvmz8nofh4.fsf@cathode-dark-space.mit.edu>
Lines: 11
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Spam-Score: 1.217
X-Spam-Level: * (1.217)
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Scanned-BY: MIMEDefang 2.42
RT-Send-Cc: 
X-RT-Original-Encoding: us-ascii
Content-Length: 446

>>>>> "Sam" == Sam Hartman via RT <rt-comment@krbdev.mit.edu> writes:

Sam> If it is a completely unqualified name, like foobar_baz, then it is
Sam> important that KFW and KFM do the same thing.  It's also important
Sam> that if you change either the KFW or KFM behavior you discuss with
Sam> Jeff or Alexis to confirm.

Do KfW and KfM currently do the same thing for un-prefixed names?  It
looks like they do, but I wanted to make sure.

---Tom