X-Recipient:	archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com
DomainKey-Signature:	a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=sourceware.org; h=list-id
	:list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-archive:list-post
	:list-help:sender:date:from:to:subject:message-id:reply-to
	:references:mime-version:content-type:in-reply-to; q=dns; s=
	default; b=aBh0q31wD3FaERzxF52cGEc9YSoE9pwhm9WAKihEHfYa9DNOGBChV
	WCwQOlSDZaOwvl0MCoVc2jsykejztugAQxXVOhAIBoyTfaT6RPWM1At7KZRauBTC
	YKJ27CutYcNy4cEijbWkzNSmYkQlZY8JZLT4vOgWuC9A96KCrKt3Us=
DKIM-Signature:	v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=sourceware.org; h=list-id
	:list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-archive:list-post
	:list-help:sender:date:from:to:subject:message-id:reply-to
	:references:mime-version:content-type:in-reply-to; s=default;
	bh=fQ9gqvgiV8PE43X6UxkR/kL2K98=; b=JSEpZ0d/Xio9TPnDj1r/3Nq2BPl7
	1ACOxAJWYfv95IrrU8BWbXqjnwiK7RzxPPg0XkKl7vu4Cj+B+6yzd/rrRj7W75qN
	1LMDj8Oo5q/lwnh1HaaUQqBJDMiTFGU22usjvWXxCjBXsxhGdA5l/ek2B4vjYfga
	3hqZiHjWAc/G5oI=
Mailing-List:	contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Id:	<cygwin.cygwin.com>
List-Subscribe:	<mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive:	<http://sourceware.org/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post:	<mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help:	<mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender:	cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To:	mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Authentication-Results:	sourceware.org; auth=none
X-Virus-Found:	No
X-Spam-SWARE-Status:	No, score=-5.9 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 autolearn=ham version=3.3.2
X-HELO:	calimero.vinschen.de
Date:	Wed, 30 Jul 2014 21:29:49 +0200
From:	Corinna Vinschen <corinna-cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject:	Re: Simplify AD integration?
Message-ID:	<20140730192949.GV25860@calimero.vinschen.de>
Reply-To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
References:	<20140730134716 DOT GM25860 AT calimero DOT vinschen DOT de> <lrbcnp$bg5$1 AT ger DOT gmane DOT org> <20140730184009 DOT GS25860 AT calimero DOT vinschen DOT de> <53D942F6 DOT 10402 AT redhat DOT com>
MIME-Version:	1.0
In-Reply-To:	<53D942F6.10402@redhat.com>
User-Agent:	Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12)

--zsAhXfiBV62A5hVr
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Jul 30 13:09, Eric Blake wrote:
> On 07/30/2014 12:40 PM, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
>=20
> >>> 2. Shall we stick to '+' as the separator char or choose another one?
> >>>    If so, which one?
> >>
> >> How about "@"?
> >=20
> > Dunno.  It *might* be a good alternative to '+'.  Personally I just
> > dislike that a '@' is a less "light" character and it might give a wrong
> > idea.  Email:  name AT domain.  Cygwin account:  domain AT name.
>=20
> How bad would it be to treat the window's DOMAIN\user as cygwin
> user AT DOMAIN?  Yes, it means string-splicing to rearrange strings when
> converting between the two forms, rather than just single-character
> replacement, but it might work.

It's more or less simple from a coding perspective, slightly more
complicated when evaluating the incoming name in a call to
getpwnam/getgrnam.

But I'm concerned that using this form is worse than DOMAIN AT user.  As
you know, starting with Active Directory in Windows 2000, there are two
variations of the domain name.

The first is the Netbios domain name as used in pre-Windows 2000
already.  It's called "flat name" and it consist of alphanumeric chars
only.  The Windows expression for this type of username is
FLATEXAMPLE\user.

The second, more modern is the DNS-type domain name.  In this case the
domain name is a DNS-style name like example.com.  A username in this
style is written like a email address (trying to workaround the mailing
list filters) user AT example DOT com.  You can use this style to login
to your machine, for instance.

FLATEXAMPLE and example.com are the same domain, just two different
names for the same thing.

LookupAccountSid and LookupAccountName return the FLATEXAMPLE domain and
that's used in the Cygwin username.

If you start using the FLATEXAMPLE domain in the writing style of
the DNS-style domain, I can see a lot of confusion coming up.  This
does in no way reflect what the users use with native Windows.

"name @ FLATEXAMPLE?!?  Shouldn't that be name AT example DOT com?"

OTOH, if we use the DNS-style name as username, we introduce an even
more complex naming scheme on the commandline, with additional dots.
I'm not sure how useful that is.

Does that make sense?


Corinna


--=20
Corinna Vinschen                  Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to
Cygwin Maintainer                 cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Red Hat

--zsAhXfiBV62A5hVr
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1
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=rGrY
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--zsAhXfiBV62A5hVr--

- Raw text -