Re: [nfsv4] draft-ietf-nfsv4-umask

"J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@fieldses.org> Fri, 25 August 2017 17:25 UTC

Return-Path: <bfields@fieldses.org>
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 1CA09126C7A for <nfsv4@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 25 Aug 2017 10:25:37 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.9
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 aqbQ_KxkyK9a for <nfsv4@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 25 Aug 2017 10:25:34 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from fieldses.org (fieldses.org [173.255.197.46]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BD05E1321B0 for <nfsv4@ietf.org>; Fri, 25 Aug 2017 10:25:34 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by fieldses.org (Postfix, from userid 2815) id 91BD227D0; Fri, 25 Aug 2017 13:25:22 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2017 13:25:22 -0400
From: "J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@fieldses.org>
To: spencer shepler <spencer.shepler@gmail.com>
Cc: David Noveck <davenoveck@gmail.com>, hch <hch@lst.de>, Thomas Haynes <loghyr@primarydata.com>, "nfsv4@ietf.org" <nfsv4@ietf.org>
Message-ID: <20170825172522.GB28124@fieldses.org>
References: <CCE6471D-5252-4313-BDED-5EAA468E3FAA@primarydata.com> <20170823155536.GA10035@fieldses.org> <CAFt6Ba=Ab=TLURRJ9ULdmU_8FydkeijfoHpgzd1bBTtx6YcBHQ@mail.gmail.com> <7824C7CB-FA68-4BC8-BF92-F93B37521B91@primarydata.com> <CADaq8jd51=2fU=jzi-f17E5Yr-0ZJ461uuXC33Ff90YoCsQtDw@mail.gmail.com> <20170824083637.GA19186@lst.de> <5FBC8622-3207-4B5C-A6F6-B90FBD7492D0@primarydata.com> <20170824164508.GA21609@fieldses.org> <CADaq8jdv9thBKqBViR=SEgbiUDe7c3kB_rpbB3w_F43sNFV9Yg@mail.gmail.com> <CAFt6BakwE_p6Fg95GFNK_xF0Ph2TQi8S2xynA44vFBm+cYLrJA@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CAFt6BakwE_p6Fg95GFNK_xF0Ph2TQi8S2xynA44vFBm+cYLrJA@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/nfsv4/Sf-13GnI-mkIMLf1EwcflQ6MAYo>
Subject: Re: [nfsv4] draft-ietf-nfsv4-umask
X-BeenThere: nfsv4@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
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, 25 Aug 2017 17:25:37 -0000

On Fri, Aug 25, 2017 at 09:49:01AM -0700, spencer shepler wrote:
> Bruce,
> 
> Do you agree to make changes as per Tom's original request?

I can do it, it might just take a week or two to get to it.

(Or Tom can send a patch--source is in
git://linux-nfs.org/~bfields/NFSv4-umask.git.)

--b.

> 
> Spencer
> 
> On Thu, Aug 24, 2017 at 10:46 AM, David Noveck <davenoveck@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> > > And I just got a "draft approved for publication"
> > > email yesterday so I was kinda surprised there's still time.
> >
> > It can take a while to get from approval for publication to AUTH48, which
> > always
> > takes longer than 48 hours.
> >
> > With 8178, I was pretty lucky in that in that it took only five weeks.
> >
> > 8154 took over five months.
> >
> > > Clearly I don't understand how this works.
> >
> > You are not alone.  Just because there will be a delay does not mean you
> > are free
> > to make changes, even well-justified ones, at any time in that period.  It
> > is best to
> > co-ordinate with the Spencers.
> >
> > On Thu, Aug 24, 2017 at 12:45 PM, J. Bruce Fields <bfields@fieldses.org>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> On Thu, Aug 24, 2017 at 03:46:41PM +0000, Thomas Haynes wrote:
> >> >
> >> > On Aug 24, 2017, at 1:36 AM, Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de<mailtomailto:
> >> hch@lst.de>> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> FYI, I agree with the request - every NFS RFC should be able to
> >> >> produce valid XDR.
> >> >>
> >> >> While we're at it it would be great if we had a way to merge the XDR
> >> >> sniplets from the various RFCs so that we can have an official
> >> >> combined XDR that we know is valid and can be used as starting point
> >> >> for implementations.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > I did this earlier this week:
> >> > https://github.com/loghyr/nfsv42_xdr
> >>
> >> Thanks!
> >>
> >> I think Christoph was looking for something automatic, though?  Like a
> >> script you could feed RFC URLs to and have it spit out an XDR file.
> >>
> >> I guess it could be nice, I'm just afraid it may take me a few days to
> >> get around to it.  And I just got a "draft approved for publication"
> >> email yesterday so I was kinda surprised there's still time.  Clearly I
> >> don't understand how this works.
> >>
> >> --b.
> >>
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > nfsv4 mailing list
> > nfsv4@ietf.org
> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nfsv4
> >
> >