Re: GSS-APIv3 sketch

[Nicolas Williams <[e-mail]>]

On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 12:11:40PM -0600, Nicolas Williams wrote:
>        - the API is the SPI, _mostly_, but there's a function that each
> 	 provider must provide by which a mechglue above it can
> 	 configure the provider
> 
> 	  - among other things, [...]

To be clear, the SPI is not exactly the API, and my description of the
differences between the two was not intended to be complete ("among
other things, ...").

Besides the differences I pointed out in the original and follow-ups,
it's reasonable to have some slight semantic differences, such as: a
provider not providing async support, with the mechglue invoking the
provider on a helper thread so as to layer async support above it
(Jeff's suggestion), or a provider not providing per-msg token
concurrency but the mechglue providing it on the provider's behalf.

There may be other differences, but the point stands: the SPI will be
_mostly_ the same as the API.  The rationale is as given in one of those
follow-ups: the more similar the two, the easier it is to generate
mechglue code, plus, there's no obvious reason to want the two
interfaces to diverge in more than minor ways.

But if someone has any reasons to want the two interfaces to diverge
radically, I'd love to hear them.

Nico
--