Re: [nfsv4] Last call for NSDB Protocol for Federated Filesystems (Oct 4 - Oct 22nd)

[James Lentini <[e-mail]>]

On Thu, 4 Nov 2010, Nicolas Williams wrote:

> 
> I think we should pre-define an attribute for back pointers, as that
> seems valuable even though it's unreliable.

There isn't interest in this across vendors.
 
> I think a free-form text annotation for sysadmins to make notes is 
> also a good idea.

This is part of the specification. See the fedfsDescr.
 
> I don't think a free-for-all attribute/value namespace is a good 
> idea, as then each vendor will add random things that will then 
> create interop problems (because of collisions, because others will 
> feel pressured to implement the same attributes with 
> undocumented/obscure/unstable semantics, ...).  OTOH, a 
> FedFS-specific attribute/value namespace subject to IANA 
> registration would be fine, and even desirable for the reasons that 
> you state.

Would the registration of vendor-specific attributes be allowed?

-james