[nfsv4] Review of draft-ietf-nfsv4-rfc5661sesqui-msns-01
Magnus Westerlund <magnus.westerlund@ericsson.com> Fri, 20 September 2019 15:38 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 0CD1612000F; Fri, 20 Sep 2019 08:38:40 -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, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, 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); 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 zTLgoC9ZD3kZ; Fri, 20 Sep 2019 08:38:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from EUR04-DB3-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-eopbgr60041.outbound.protection.outlook.com [40.107.6.41]) (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 5F928120019; Fri, 20 Sep 2019 08:38:37 -0700 (PDT)
ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=ApVnpkJgRUtjlBbCHheweRMF/6xOE8u5r30I16MVPUD7Ihiuq4ubndb7UPTc6hInBHlzfGpYEkIK3YHk+TvTvnpXNGTd9Qn49VrTK/pcRZs85yTSuZF9R3AIBldiX2kzG+HOg32AwuAJ4f4KOgv6+V5LXsDeBon3+cliPW5NlZnL53AOyONvXB6O1TuX8WPNeEfuy2x9ZPCSNX0NCPUdJ6MWUui1zsLGlAFaxgm8kex0ybszjKIdcUcLiBPBnOZPoA0vN1LxVyut5kSShES74grcQCpKTd5v/PATwenfXwPDpHX3ZKpRg5QtA1EAY+BhIccm3MwnqqPVLqGdjGGCvA==
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=ny6s2Hitm14Dy7I85QDUzyAKF7QfsI5eEV6/rDvige4=; b=BhgovpKBZtPhyqxS4pAEb9oiWAJIItPfhYVrm+5tMBMDbhvS0RcnKvhy/yX0TaQiCNitttihYZoJLknuVs4di9c9am6TIdjlXv+4D2j2pFKf1qyfNNiLX2NiPb2Yk2Z3KudAiqwid9B6s7IfuX1J54uk6rAE6yiMME2QHbzWqj1TyIcvzpIKhPZeZyutigW0jRsPIIJDq1UxN4j+B8ShpDGNVir0qBJYaUPxR863BuPOT5PRd5kUtfs/fdo9q+dQcwiDHUJmwTXo5M4qndJtdz9A2xFX9oBLDG99w8TfjnvYuCD+CdSp9mSyHFba8nBcDhjqze6YIfoPctpuRVOWAw==
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=selector2; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=ny6s2Hitm14Dy7I85QDUzyAKF7QfsI5eEV6/rDvige4=; b=gvrfYsuCkDgrn8OZkEB/eJDjdJPs8y64n5RmYH5+nTPaY5RLPhCNMGd47GOkFR+kFL/8CsuY3Z+TLhC/aTMMrW/skTuG/ag/iJsc8qhVtXVGR6eueXQyRQ5QVoTLZqW09bZHZOFCytDyD6BaZffsmVFuH48LeJ0BCQ+qDFGoptg=
Received: from DB7PR07MB5736.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com (20.177.194.155) by DB7PR07MB6155.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com (20.178.104.96) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.2284.17; Fri, 20 Sep 2019 15:38:34 +0000
Received: from DB7PR07MB5736.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::e48c:a942:9682:2ce4]) by DB7PR07MB5736.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::e48c:a942:9682:2ce4%7]) with mapi id 15.20.2284.009; Fri, 20 Sep 2019 15:38:34 +0000
From: Magnus Westerlund <magnus.westerlund@ericsson.com>
To: "nfsv4@ietf.org" <nfsv4@ietf.org>, "draft-ietf-nfsv4-rfc5661sesqui-msns@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-nfsv4-rfc5661sesqui-msns@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: Review of draft-ietf-nfsv4-rfc5661sesqui-msns-01
Thread-Index: AdVu63MmcXjOwh9ATeGzlQ8FlnrI3Q==
Date: Fri, 20 Sep 2019 15:38:34 +0000
Message-ID: <DB7PR07MB5736DCA699046998B565A5FA95880@DB7PR07MB5736.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com>
Accept-Language: sv-SE, en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach: yes
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
authentication-results: spf=none (sender IP is ) smtp.mailfrom=magnus.westerlund@ericsson.com;
x-originating-ip: [192.176.1.87]
x-ms-publictraffictype: Email
x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: 374c7911-06c2-48aa-bd12-08d73de09933
x-microsoft-antispam: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(2390118)(7020095)(4652040)(8989299)(5600167)(711020)(4605104)(1401327)(4534185)(4627221)(201703031133081)(201702281549075)(8990200)(2017052603328)(49563074)(7193020); SRVR:DB7PR07MB6155;
x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: DB7PR07MB6155:
x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: <DB7PR07MB615537748CB6460A5874D38595880@DB7PR07MB6155.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com>
x-ms-oob-tlc-oobclassifiers: OLM:8882;
x-forefront-prvs: 0166B75B74
x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10009020)(4636009)(346002)(136003)(39860400002)(376002)(396003)(366004)(199004)(189003)(7736002)(2501003)(476003)(44832011)(6306002)(450100002)(966005)(74316002)(55016002)(99286004)(86362001)(110136005)(186003)(81166006)(14454004)(8676002)(33656002)(66066001)(81156014)(8936002)(6506007)(5660300002)(316002)(790700001)(66476007)(3846002)(25786009)(66616009)(7696005)(478600001)(52536014)(66946007)(6116002)(9686003)(486006)(76116006)(66556008)(99936001)(64756008)(26005)(71190400001)(54896002)(71200400001)(66446008)(236005)(606006)(102836004)(6436002)(256004)(14444005)(2906002); DIR:OUT; SFP:1101; SCL:1; SRVR:DB7PR07MB6155; H:DB7PR07MB5736.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; LANG:en; PTR:InfoNoRecords; A:1; MX:1;
received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: ericsson.com does not designate permitted sender hosts)
x-ms-exchange-senderadcheck: 1
x-microsoft-antispam-message-info: aTuhSSMmvI0DFp/BaDBLXQEsOBPywPVJRCow9ucxahP6f2FNhZjppq+PGOntZIrd21oQSvd8lCPeucQ31EViN0sO7RcxU4r3Gcu2IMER9ulJqo2lglD6lat4IhWxGDr5bJ9lmAIMZuvwnkQiadPWvVujNlHUr9BETANOrC/R/S/033QIyn2GZ4TbhqhPWdbU5tqupVGnaJWGI0PtNllTmlHVlVUqsPR2jOooey/ceFhJ9ChTb77c/Uz8GKPV9Smbw/Nic0O8TjIx0I5yh4W0PDa+RQSqkJOA/4onvJ0jCYDFEgRH+9tgCcmoBeJNW6qkZmgvIdsQGAFHtI6hw/XEnOQI0Pz7eyCRX/7ynM/0/FZAYBH28rjtzrM/RP1SyTucl3DGSD72TPdlSzPLNiSRsDkBt3y4lp1gobRE3aWwsw4=
x-ms-exchange-transport-forked: True
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg="SHA1"; protocol="application/x-pkcs7-signature"; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0021_01D56FDA.3918D4E0"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-OriginatorOrg: ericsson.com
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: 374c7911-06c2-48aa-bd12-08d73de09933
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 20 Sep 2019 15:38:34.7148 (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: K2on2Qp58mfjW8Xx3cP1P4/MhpACJozEWarGJmbHp7vy17KsUxypjMbMH74jOF84xI5JU4gnVzO/gjxnxtoNhw0ySMRWOk+6zihSSeHbvRg=
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: DB7PR07MB6155
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/nfsv4/M7pAZe2QW4W6qUe8cKYkvG7jMlU>
Subject: [nfsv4] Review of draft-ietf-nfsv4-rfc5661sesqui-msns-01
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, 20 Sep 2019 15:38:40 -0000
Hi, I have now done my review of draft-ietf-nfsv4-rfc5661sesqui-msns-01. The review focuses on introduction, appendix and other things related to the format of the update. I have also gone through the Diff to glance through the changes. 1. Section 1.1. Work would have to be done with regard to RFC8178 [61] with which RFC5661 [60] is curretly inconsistent, in order to arrive at a situation in which there would be no need for RFC8178 to update the NFSv4.1 specfication. I would recommend that you include some words, either title or some summary of what RFC 8178 is in this text as it is the first occurrence of the reference. 2. The same comment as above also applies to the next paragraph in respect to RFC 8434. 3. Section 1.1: Regarding the second bullet: o Work would have to be done with regard to RFC8434 [64] which curently updates RFC5661 [60]. When that work is done and the resulting document approved, the new NFSv4.1 specfication will obsolete RFC8434 as well as RFC5661. a. When it comes to updating this document, there are no purpose in a single document. What I understand of the goal with creating complete RFCs with updates is to avoid having to combine descriptions. However, if 8434 is a self contained functionality it could actually remain as is, and simply be normatively referenced by 5661bis as being part of NFS 4.1 protocol. Now, I haven't read through the documents to understand if this is a possibility or that integrating it is the obvious way forward. 3. What I wrote in 3. Is why there clearly is a possibility to resolve i18n in a manner that applies to all minor versions . 4. Section 1.1. I think this text should drop the use of a single document in favor of talking about a set of authorative correct specifications. I think you could consider the language Adam Roach uses in https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-roach-bis-documents/ to motivate this approach. 5. Section 1.1: There is a need for a revised treatment of security of in NFSv4.1. The issues with the existing treatment are discussed in Appendix C. Note the two "of" in first sentence. 6. Section 1.1: I think the first paragraphs should be a bit more explicit about that this is a limited scope update. I would suggest the following: The revised description of the NFS version 4 minor version 1 (NFSv4.1) protocol presented in this update is necessary to enable full use of trunking in connection with multi-server namespace features and to enable the use of transparent state migration in connection with NFSv4.1. This document is in the form of a updated description of the NFS 4.1 protocol previously defined in [RFC5661]. RFC5661 is obsoleted by this document. However, the update has a limited and focused scope on enabling full use of trunking, the need for these changes are discussed in Appendix A. Appendix B described the specific changes made to arrive at the current text. This limited scope update is applied on the main NFSv4.1 RFC is intending to provide an authorative complete specification, the motivation for this is discussed in [I.D-roach-bis-documents], addressing the issues within the scope of the update. However, it will not address issues that are known but outside of this limited scope as could expected by a full update of the protocol. Below are some areas which are known to need addressing in a future update of the protocol. 7. Section 22: IANA Consideration As this document is going to obsolete RFC5661 it will be necessary to instruct IANA to update all registry entries and registry rules references that points to RFC5661 to point to this document instead. Cheers Magnus Westerlund
- [nfsv4] Review of draft-ietf-nfsv4-rfc5661sesqui-… Magnus Westerlund
- Re: [nfsv4] Review of draft-ietf-nfsv4-rfc5661ses… David Noveck
- Re: [nfsv4] Review of draft-ietf-nfsv4-rfc5661ses… David Noveck
- Re: [nfsv4] Review of draft-ietf-nfsv4-rfc5661ses… Magnus Westerlund