Re: [nfsv4] 3530bis Issue 39: Clarification on renewing sequence IDs

[Robert Thurlow <[e-mail]>]

Robert Thurlow wrote:
> Hi folks,
> 
> This is issue 39 from 
> http://github.com/loghyr/3530bis/blob/master/tasklist.txt.
> 
> In implementing NFSv4 migration support, we believe that
> MOVED and LEASE_MOVED need to be added to the list of errors
> in 8.1.5 which do NOT result in incrementing the open owner
> or lock owner sequence ID.  The goal is to make the sequence
> ID readily calculable for both the client and the destination
> server after the migration has occurred.
> 
> On the 3530bis call, this appeared exactly backwards to some
> others - that since a completely gross error had not occurred,
> we should increment the sequence ID and the client and the
> destination server should know to expect that when they interact
> after a migration.  I do not know this issue well enough to
> properly defend a position, so please reply with your reasoned
> opinion :-)

I don't think this has had a response.  If you disagree with
the wording change, now is the time to say so.

Rob T