Re: [nfsv4] [Errata Rejected] RFC5661 (5212)

Magnus Westerlund <magnus.westerlund@ericsson.com> Fri, 04 September 2020 07:19 UTC

Return-Path: <magnus.westerlund@ericsson.com>
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 79D9B3A0F72 for <nfsv4@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 4 Sep 2020 00:19:40 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.102
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.102 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=ericsson.com
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 FYXdPowCHEHV for <nfsv4@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 4 Sep 2020 00:19:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from EUR04-HE1-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-eopbgr70071.outbound.protection.outlook.com [40.107.7.71]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EA3993A0F52 for <nfsv4@ietf.org>; Fri, 4 Sep 2020 00:19:37 -0700 (PDT)
ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=XG4AvLM0HD6SQpPEtbVx098cVaYXy3iWZkQXtZnmjcUlYUVCLcXTWofJjT7L6acnS0QUaJ6YjURannjNfE4+tTVhK3KawuzcsU51gbcS8OsoH8hjN5+g9I9zu6aYBrkondKMsnyfiGL76BSY2azJVtzi1f7p05goh1mr8vChAqh7ipKvqLHArebQOUdLCdHJm3tYi5DNiMDMvfgcjo7XQXZZS4dDnf0dVaBtkDYXjV9A5f1lY4fUoJjXmTaH6Cg76oHsESH3VV1s3DhW39l7cM/PAkFAi4bO5ZG9QMnlrYI6dzUgAerHGVXt/BOHZV3il9YSgfIS9ECIEeAXvNHP8g==
ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=arcselector9901; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=vGXdiVlhEXzf3W9HY0rPVPq6jtEpjl2jI+FpJauKJ0U=; b=YbQneb5NdiSOGQXLlhwjYGg0nAyTiUsgGbjcgLIbQu4RxbQdRCq2/G/Q8z7Ntx3ZDGnBh0/ho2IPv8OtdvVFOWblTScz2TyHIKChObOu3jJ+cDg73F6yHUjW2gWUztzs88By2L4RhZ2t80uva4sz+5BzMizc+P8Nj5iFfIHsa1qQbyidQcCVbjZr3EhBn1rA3U83s8w/v9ynzGNXRChXJXDvraEZzLD0HJwqZTda0EOOpa8RzYPnjOWCROSCDZMivrTKDwLhzaAPpYB/EhfqA66HMz/MNKLP9nKg7m/iTvCouvIOhJiQCHnz4s8ATp9PO9iCN6YcEkaXopjJ8yUgUQ==
ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.microsoft.com 1; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=ericsson.com; dmarc=pass action=none header.from=ericsson.com; dkim=pass header.d=ericsson.com; arc=none
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ericsson.com; s=selector1; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=vGXdiVlhEXzf3W9HY0rPVPq6jtEpjl2jI+FpJauKJ0U=; b=Gt6LsMmQ4HQzsSxIB2t9+WQdSsMi8Q02EMYqnVn1G+sNkewTg/B0WR+1YMy1ucF39Q1vzEPoSz8jWjl8hEI/RRxrm00carTfeHD970K2gPuPpg9OYX0ZE6TBy1Bkt1pPNPMzhOfCxC8mGudi/qetmHtvjBa9L6cpJ6NV6cdqHRQ=
Received: from HE1PR0702MB3772.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com (2603:10a6:7:8e::14) by HE1PR0701MB3003.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com (2603:10a6:3:4e::19) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.3370.9; Fri, 4 Sep 2020 07:19:35 +0000
Received: from HE1PR0702MB3772.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::b56f:9a8e:3399:aaa3]) by HE1PR0702MB3772.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::b56f:9a8e:3399:aaa3%7]) with mapi id 15.20.3370.010; Fri, 4 Sep 2020 07:19:35 +0000
From: Magnus Westerlund <magnus.westerlund@ericsson.com>
To: "David.Noveck@netapp.com" <David.Noveck@netapp.com>, "loghyr@primarydata.com" <loghyr@primarydata.com>, "shepler@storspeed.com" <shepler@storspeed.com>, "mike@eisler.com" <mike@eisler.com>
CC: "nfsv4@ietf.org" <nfsv4@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [Errata Rejected] RFC5661 (5212)
Thread-Index: AQHWgeTbXWcqXORLpUeZSI6j0Th6c6lW2Q8AgAADfqCAAByBgIABGqIA
Date: Fri, 4 Sep 2020 07:19:35 +0000
Message-ID: <5fb214751f62a6aabf41fd86893cdde29aa19c99.camel@ericsson.com>
References: <20200903112436.4E681F40780@rfc-editor.org> <MN2PR06MB559720AE5B2EB67CFD9AFFC4E12C0@MN2PR06MB5597.namprd06.prod.outlook.com> <VI1PR0702MB3775494778825974558D64FD952C0@VI1PR0702MB3775.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com> <MN2PR06MB559710C5CEB99920BFD6C36BE12C0@MN2PR06MB5597.namprd06.prod.outlook.com>
In-Reply-To: <MN2PR06MB559710C5CEB99920BFD6C36BE12C0@MN2PR06MB5597.namprd06.prod.outlook.com>
Accept-Language: sv-SE, en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-mailer: Evolution 3.28.5-0ubuntu0.18.04.2
authentication-results: netapp.com; dkim=none (message not signed) header.d=none;netapp.com; dmarc=none action=none header.from=ericsson.com;
x-originating-ip: [158.174.116.90]
x-ms-publictraffictype: Email
x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: 88d13d09-68b0-4e21-59b4-08d850a2e079
x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: HE1PR0701MB3003:
x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: <HE1PR0701MB30038E2732B3FBB9FAEC2B1E952D0@HE1PR0701MB3003.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com>
x-ms-oob-tlc-oobclassifiers: OLM:3968;
x-ms-exchange-senderadcheck: 1
x-microsoft-antispam: BCL:0;
x-microsoft-antispam-message-info: erSqQWGJd9JtRHoq99weXghKdVVCVHvAn87FDnbL8B+M//eytCAM7Ojhns9OO4H+OaJzGGvrEyKEZPwqWPf5rldjKhf1OPrZJdKXjJ7xnTWgLnwjqBr0CXvbttZ1XuigKHfzjHJ0yLLfAjRKFyti857iNGpsxMhkTF9pVD4jijfgfGtMUUWT/jvcLPSohU8+T+FYLhlvTVYvdCB918KAVHnfKUkMH3iIyQlvAHHvbtO+hx6+4UlX97d0Fd+ytxDVYP5nXQjlR+US+0FrR5/5k9runoRZViBrTmy79M1ijdGrqbjuKOGYnXLCzsBV6VSHryo2xzhSmLlgudCNJUJ5VkdVlLq+SfbJkm55wDPVEvmzDRxzdJUPK7eU21a4KL1veDVYpRge0Ekpz8RRFcpfBg8TwGwYh1Oesbz5xwzQXzed8NTqguOssJ2ANSmwwy2F/QMO60NWDvQXB6G4TFoGkA==
x-forefront-antispam-report: CIP:255.255.255.255; CTRY:; LANG:en; SCL:1; SRV:; IPV:NLI; SFV:NSPM; H:HE1PR0702MB3772.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com; PTR:; CAT:NONE; SFS:(4636009)(136003)(39860400002)(366004)(346002)(376002)(396003)(4326008)(316002)(71200400001)(53546011)(6506007)(6486002)(76116006)(83380400001)(2906002)(26005)(64756008)(66446008)(66476007)(66556008)(478600001)(66946007)(6512007)(8676002)(186003)(2616005)(8936002)(36756003)(44832011)(4001150100001)(86362001)(110136005)(5660300002)(966005)(99106002); DIR:OUT; SFP:1101;
x-ms-exchange-antispam-messagedata: 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
x-ms-exchange-transport-forked: True
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-ID: <BB46AD5FC4CFC44288C3D0226A4057CD@eurprd07.prod.outlook.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-OriginatorOrg: ericsson.com
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-AuthAs: Internal
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-AuthSource: HE1PR0702MB3772.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: 88d13d09-68b0-4e21-59b4-08d850a2e079
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 04 Sep 2020 07:19:35.2819 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 92e84ceb-fbfd-47ab-be52-080c6b87953f
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-mailboxtype: HOSTED
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-userprincipalname: hVfWC1B4sMlzlUjUV/hZeQm88phPma3QViFr0Jj8NZbISvC3JVm+CKPdnDfvVHX9Dcc70W8TiN1v1CjwCQWvsVUuF35fXw72ciNBgFQLl5E=
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: HE1PR0701MB3003
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/nfsv4/94zFe7RhZfUA72EK65awQscXiFE>
Subject: Re: [nfsv4] [Errata Rejected] RFC5661 (5212)
X-BeenThere: nfsv4@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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, 04 Sep 2020 07:19:41 -0000

Hi,

I will ask the RFC-editor to change this one to Held for document update.

Cheers

Magnus

On Thu, 2020-09-03 at 14:27 +0000, Noveck, David wrote:
> I might have misjudged this one.
>  
> Since your judgment differs from mine, you obviously did 😊
>  
> However, from my perspective it falls under the following part from the
> instructions:
>  
> " or proposes a change to the RFC that should be done by publishing a new RFC
> that replaces the current RFC."
> See Rejected:
> https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata-definitions/
>  
> It does.
>  
> It could likely have been put in Held for Document update.
>  
> It fits under that definition as well.   That’s a real problem with this
> approach.  Some things fit under multiple classifications.
>  
> However, I prefer
> those issues to be clearer in what is unclear or wrong and should be
> considered in the future.
> 
> I think that is clear whichever  choice is made.
>  
> You editors of the 8881bis
>  
> We’ve been calling it rfc5661bis.  8881 was rfc5661 sesqui and I don’t know
> the Latin for “two  and a half”.
>  
> will have to go though all Erratas against RFC 5661
> to determine which are already addressed and which are non-relevant and which
> needs considerations and discussion.
>  
> True.
>  
> Even before this one we had one Errata
> (https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata/eid2751) which was a significant change of
> the protocol that got rejected  due to it going beyond established consensus
> at time of publication.
>  
> That was different in that there it was clear that the new approach was
> outside the existing
> Consensus.
>  
> In this case, there is some reasonable concern that it might be outside the
> existing consensus,
> Do the working group has to discuss and decide the issue.
>  
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Magnus Westerlund <magnus.westerlund@ericsson.com> 
> Sent: Thursday, September 3, 2020 8:57 AM
> To: Noveck, David <David.Noveck@netapp.com>om>; loghyr@primarydata.com; 
> shepler@storspeed.com; mike@eisler.com
> Cc: nfsv4@ietf.org
> Subject: RE: [Errata Rejected] RFC5661 (5212)
>  
> Hi David,
>  
> I might have misjudged this one. However, from my perspective it falls under
> the following part from the instructions:
>  
> " or proposes a change to the RFC that should be done by publishing a new RFC
> that replaces the current RFC."
> See Rejected:
> https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata-definitions/
>  
> It could likely have been put in Held for Document update. However, I prefer
> those issues to be clearer in what is unclear or wrong and should be
> considered in the future.
>  
> You editors of the 8881bis will have to go though all Erratas against RFC 5661
> to determine which are already addressed and which are non-relevant and which
> needs considerations and discussion. Even before this one we had one Errata
> (https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata/eid2751) which was a significant change of
> the protocol that got rejected  due to it going beyond established consensus
> at time of publication.
>  
> If you feel strongly we can change it to Held for Document update.
>  
> Cheers
>  
> Magnus
>  
>  
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Noveck, David <David.Noveck@netapp.com>
> > Sent: den 3 september 2020 14:33
> > To: RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org>rg>; loghyr@primarydata.com;
> > shepler@storspeed.com; mike@eisler.com
> > Cc: Magnus Westerlund <magnus.westerlund@ericsson.com>om>;
> > iesg@ietf.org; nfsv4@ietf.org
> > Subject: RE: [Errata Rejected] RFC5661 (5212)
> >
> > The explanatory text, with I agree with, indicates why this Should be held
> > over for update, presumably in rf5661bis.  However the subject line says
> > "rejected" and I don't understand why.
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org>
> > Sent: Thursday, September 3, 2020 7:25 AM
> > To: loghyr@primarydata.com; shepler@storspeed.com; mike@eisler.com;
> > Noveck, David <David.Noveck@netapp.com>
> > Cc: magnus.westerlund@ericsson.com; iesg@ietf.org; nfsv4@ietf.org; rfc-
> > editor@rfc-editor.org
> > Subject: [Errata Rejected] RFC5661 (5212)
> >
> > NetApp Security WARNING: This is an external email. Do not click links or
> > open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is
> > safe.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > The following errata report has been rejected for RFC5661, "Network File
> > System (NFS) Version 4 Minor Version 1 Protocol".
> >
> > --------------------------------------
> > You may review the report below and at:
> > https://protect2.fireeye.com/v1/url?k=9b44cc6b-c5f451f3-9b448cf0-
> > 861fcb972bfc-cf4c513c9d5ddf90&q=1&e=7b26cc7e-e55f-4723-adbc-
> > 3949013eb251&u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rfc-
> > editor.org%2Ferrata%2Feid5212
> >
> > --------------------------------------
> > Status: Rejected
> > Type: Technical
> >
> > Reported by: NFS4ERR_ROFS is not a valid error code for LAYOUTGET
> > <loghyr@primarydata.com> Date Reported: 2017-12-19 Rejected by: Magnus
> > Westerlund (IESG)
> >
> > 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_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_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
> > -----
> > It could be argued that the OPEN takes care of a NFS4ERR_ROFS for a
> > LAYOUTGET of a LAYOUTIOMODE4_RW, but that does not explain why
> > WRITE is allowed to return a NFS4ERR_ROFS.
> >
> > With the Flex File Layout Type, the storage device depends on the metadata
> > server enforcing the read-only filesystem semantics. An NFSv3 WRITE to the
> > storage device might be accepted even though the filesystem might be RO.
> > Further, if a snapshot is taken, the storage device might not be aware of
> > the
> > fact that a data file is in a snapshot.
> >
> > Currently, if the underlying filesystem determines that the LAYOUTGET for a
> > LAYOUTIOMODE4_RW is going to return NFS4ERR_ROFS, to be spec
> > compliant, it MUST convert the error code to NFS4ERR_SERVERFAULT.  The
> > client may then decide to perform IO through the metadata server with
> > NFSv4 WRITE calls, which will in turn get a NFS4ERR_ROFS error. This change
> > pushes the responsibility to be on the LAYOUTGET and allows the client to
> > inform the application of an error earlier.
> >
> > AD Comments:
> > This topic requires WG discussion and establishment of consensus. Thus for
> > future document update.
> >
> >  --VERIFIER NOTES--
> >    This topic requires WG discussion and establishment of consensus. Thus
> > for
> > future document update.
> >
> >
> > --------------------------------------
> > 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
>  
-- 
Cheers

Magnus Westerlund 


----------------------------------------------------------------------
Networks, Ericsson Research
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ericsson AB                 | Phone  +46 10 7148287
Torshamnsgatan 23           | Mobile +46 73 0949079
SE-164 80 Stockholm, Sweden | mailto: magnus.westerlund@ericsson.com
----------------------------------------------------------------------