Re: [nfsv4] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC5661 (5467)
"Mirja Kuehlewind (IETF)" <ietf@kuehlewind.net> Fri, 17 August 2018 14:19 UTC
Return-Path: <ietf@kuehlewind.net>
X-Original-To: nfsv4@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: nfsv4@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 92C8F130E72 for <nfsv4@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 17 Aug 2018 07:19:25 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); domainkeys=pass (1024-bit key) header.from=ietf@kuehlewind.net header.d=kuehlewind.net
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ykOeDZlQjwN7 for <nfsv4@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 17 Aug 2018 07:19:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from kuehlewind.net (kuehlewind.net [83.169.45.111]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1B8DB130E67 for <nfsv4@ietf.org>; Fri, 17 Aug 2018 07:19:22 -0700 (PDT)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=default; d=kuehlewind.net; b=b+MFV1j9guDHfqUmLmTh961NsI34stHU+X/VlJG+p2+A0d5+20DRMSeTK6QE3UgVk6nkuLA/U4KfRu9adEaeCz0lW7CBq7mNWPesx3HRyxaMPcURWUV56NiwsJv8l/YfdODtgdaETFcAmJ5iHHdmWLNz7AYQNGK+1iIX1mGfK8c=; h=Received:Received:Content-Type:Mime-Version:Subject:From:In-Reply-To:Date:Cc:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Message-Id:References:To:X-Mailer:X-PPP-Message-ID:X-PPP-Vhost;
Received: (qmail 30643 invoked from network); 17 Aug 2018 16:18:20 +0200
Received: from mue-88-130-61-030.dsl.tropolys.de (HELO ?192.168.178.24?) (88.130.61.30) by kuehlewind.net with ESMTPSA (DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA encrypted, authenticated); 17 Aug 2018 16:18:20 +0200
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 11.5 \(3445.9.1\))
From: "Mirja Kuehlewind (IETF)" <ietf@kuehlewind.net>
In-Reply-To: <BN7PR06MB38422A2DD247DB0E4E0619E6E13D0@BN7PR06MB3842.namprd06.prod.outlook.com>
Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2018 16:18:19 +0200
Cc: RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org>, "shepler@storspeed.com" <shepler@storspeed.com>, "mike@eisler.com" <mike@eisler.com>, "spencerdawkins.ietf@gmail.com" <spencerdawkins.ietf@gmail.com>, "beepee@gmail.com" <beepee@gmail.com>, "spencer.shepler@gmail.com" <spencer.shepler@gmail.com>, "trondmy@gmail.com" <trondmy@gmail.com>, "nfsv4@ietf.org" <nfsv4@ietf.org>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <8D2BAFB2-DF15-41EA-B010-7285700C6215@kuehlewind.net>
References: <20180817021809.99310B8087C@rfc-editor.org> <BN7PR06MB38422A2DD247DB0E4E0619E6E13D0@BN7PR06MB3842.namprd06.prod.outlook.com>
To: "Noveck, David" <David.Noveck@netapp.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.9.1)
X-PPP-Message-ID: <20180817141820.30631.63726@lvps83-169-45-111.dedicated.hosteurope.de>
X-PPP-Vhost: kuehlewind.net
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/nfsv4/7MYNu2BDlfVUYwsT6L7NRg07njw>
Subject: Re: [nfsv4] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC5661 (5467)
X-BeenThere: nfsv4@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27
Precedence: list
List-Id: NFSv4 Working Group <nfsv4.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/nfsv4>, <mailto:nfsv4-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/nfsv4/>
List-Post: <mailto:nfsv4@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:nfsv4-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nfsv4>, <mailto:nfsv4-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2018 14:19:26 -0000
The responsible AD (Spencer Dawkins) is responsible to verify the errata in the system. > Am 17.08.2018 um 13:46 schrieb Noveck, David <David.Noveck@netapp.com>: > >> If necessary, please use "Reply All" to discuss whether it should be verified or rejected. > > Should be verified. > >> When a decision is reached, > > Not clear how that happens. > >> the verifying party can log in to change the status and edit the report, if necessary. > > Not sure who that is. Will the "verifying party" please identify himself or herself. > > -----Original Message----- > From: RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org> > Sent: Thursday, August 16, 2018 10:18 PM > To: shepler@storspeed.com; mike@eisler.com; Noveck, David <David.Noveck@netapp.com>; spencerdawkins.ietf@gmail.com; ietf@kuehlewind.net; beepee@gmail.com; spencer.shepler@gmail.com > Cc: trondmy@gmail.com; nfsv4@ietf.org; rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org > Subject: [Technical Errata Reported] RFC5661 (5467) > > The following errata report has been submitted for RFC5661, "Network File System (NFS) Version 4 Minor Version 1 Protocol". > > -------------------------------------- > You may review the report below and at: > http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata/eid5467 > > -------------------------------------- > Type: Technical > Reported by: Trond Myklebust <trondmy@gmail.com> > > Section: 15.2 > > Original Text > ------------- > | LAYOUTGET | NFS4ERR_ACCESS, NFS4ERR_ADMIN_REVOKED, | > | | NFS4ERR_BADIOMODE, NFS4ERR_BADLAYOUT, | > | | NFS4ERR_BADXDR, NFS4ERR_BAD_STATEID, | > | | NFS4ERR_DEADSESSION, NFS4ERR_DELAY, | > | | NFS4ERR_DELEG_REVOKED, NFS4ERR_DQUOT, | > | | NFS4ERR_FHEXPIRED, NFS4ERR_GRACE, | > | | NFS4ERR_INVAL, NFS4ERR_IO, | > | | NFS4ERR_LAYOUTTRYLATER, | > | | NFS4ERR_LAYOUTUNAVAILABLE, NFS4ERR_LOCKED, | > | | NFS4ERR_MOVED, NFS4ERR_NOFILEHANDLE, | > | | NFS4ERR_NOSPC, NFS4ERR_NOTSUPP, | > | | NFS4ERR_OLD_STATEID, NFS4ERR_OPENMODE, | > | | NFS4ERR_OP_NOT_IN_SESSION, | > | | NFS4ERR_RECALLCONFLICT, | > | | NFS4ERR_REP_TOO_BIG, | > | | NFS4ERR_REP_TOO_BIG_TO_CACHE, | > | | NFS4ERR_REQ_TOO_BIG, | > | | NFS4ERR_RETRY_UNCACHED_REP, NFS4ERR_ROFS, | > | | NFS4ERR_SERVERFAULT, NFS4ERR_STALE, | > | | NFS4ERR_TOOSMALL, NFS4ERR_TOO_MANY_OPS, | > | | NFS4ERR_UNKNOWN_LAYOUTTYPE, | > | | NFS4ERR_WRONG_TYPE | > > Corrected Text > -------------- > | LAYOUTGET | NFS4ERR_ACCESS, NFS4ERR_ADMIN_REVOKED, | > | | NFS4ERR_BADIOMODE, NFS4ERR_BADLAYOUT, | > | | NFS4ERR_BADXDR, NFS4ERR_BAD_STATEID, | > | | NFS4ERR_DEADSESSION, NFS4ERR_DELAY, | > | | NFS4ERR_DELEG_REVOKED, NFS4ERR_DQUOT, | > | | NFS4ERR_EXPIRED, NFS4ERR_FHEXPIRED, | > | | NFS4ERR_GRACE, NFS4ERR_INVAL, NFS4ERR_IO, | > | | NFS4ERR_LAYOUTTRYLATER, | > | | NFS4ERR_LAYOUTUNAVAILABLE, NFS4ERR_LOCKED, | > | | NFS4ERR_MOVED, NFS4ERR_NOFILEHANDLE, | > | | NFS4ERR_NOSPC, NFS4ERR_NOTSUPP, | > | | NFS4ERR_OLD_STATEID, NFS4ERR_OPENMODE, | > | | NFS4ERR_OP_NOT_IN_SESSION, | > | | NFS4ERR_RECALLCONFLICT, | > | | NFS4ERR_REP_TOO_BIG, | > | | NFS4ERR_REP_TOO_BIG_TO_CACHE, | > | | NFS4ERR_REQ_TOO_BIG, | > | | NFS4ERR_RETRY_UNCACHED_REP, NFS4ERR_ROFS, | > | | NFS4ERR_SERVERFAULT, NFS4ERR_STALE, | > | | NFS4ERR_TOOSMALL, NFS4ERR_TOO_MANY_OPS, | > | | NFS4ERR_UNKNOWN_LAYOUTTYPE, | > | | NFS4ERR_WRONG_TYPE | > > Notes > ----- > LAYOUTGET takes a stateid argument that can represent either a layout or a delegation, or open/lock state. As such, it needs to be able to report back when the state represented by that stateid has expired. > > Instructions: > ------------- > This erratum is currently posted as "Reported". If necessary, please use "Reply All" to discuss whether it should be verified or rejected. When a decision is reached, the verifying party can log in to change the status and edit the report, if necessary. > > -------------------------------------- > RFC5661 (draft-ietf-nfsv4-minorversion1-29) > -------------------------------------- > Title : Network File System (NFS) Version 4 Minor Version 1 Protocol > Publication Date : January 2010 > Author(s) : S. Shepler, Ed., M. Eisler, Ed., D. Noveck, Ed. > Category : PROPOSED STANDARD > Source : Network File System Version 4 > Area : Transport > Stream : IETF > Verifying Party : IESG
- [nfsv4] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC5661 (5467) RFC Errata System
- Re: [nfsv4] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC5661 (… Noveck, David
- Re: [nfsv4] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC5661 (… Mirja Kuehlewind (IETF)