[nfsv4] feedback on draft-ietf-nfsv4-versioning-06

[Mike Kupfer <[e-mail]>]

I think we're converging, but there are still a couple issues I'd like
to see addressed.

* Section 4.4.2: I'd like this section to re-emphasize that the
  requester should try early on to establish knowledge about what the
  other node supports.  Perhaps add this text to the last paragraph in
  the section:

    This should normally be done as part of a negotiation phase, prior
    to acting on user requests.
  
* Section 4.4.3: I'd like to see more text related to the handling
  of multiple bits in the same request.  Perhaps before the bullet list,
  add something like

    Note that in the case of attribute or flag bits, a request that
    refers to 2 or more bits of undetermined status (known versus
    unknown) may return ambiguous results.  If the response is
    NFS4ERR_INVAL, the requester can only conclude that at least one of
    the bits is unknown.

* Section 9.1, corrections to required features: the approach here makes
  sense, but it seems to conflict with wording elsewhere in the spec,
  specifically

  1. end of page 5, top of page 6:

      For example, one may refer to the set of REQUIRED features in a
      given minor version since it is the same for all variants within the
      minor version.

  2. page 10:

      The protocol element is defined as a REQUIRED part of the base minor
      version.  In this case, the requester can expect the protocol
      element to be both known and supported by the responder.

  Maybe ", barring protocol corrections, " should be added at appropriate
  places in these two sections?

regards,
mike