Re: [nfsv4] Eric Rescorla's Discuss on draft-ietf-nfsv4-xattrs-05: (with DISCUSS)

Nico Williams <nico@cryptonector.com> Mon, 05 June 2017 20:13 UTC

Return-Path: <nico@cryptonector.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 2D0851293DA; Mon, 5 Jun 2017 13:13:01 -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, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001] 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 cTwwmZ8P59ju; Mon, 5 Jun 2017 13:13:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from homiemail-a66.g.dreamhost.com (sub4.mail.dreamhost.com [69.163.253.135]) (using TLSv1.1 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 20C4D126CE8; Mon, 5 Jun 2017 13:13:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from homiemail-a66.g.dreamhost.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by homiemail-a66.g.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8C0DCC002827; Mon, 5 Jun 2017 13:12:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (cpe-70-123-158-140.austin.res.rr.com [70.123.158.140]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: nico@cryptonector.com) by homiemail-a66.g.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 3DF7EC002823; Mon, 5 Jun 2017 13:12:28 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Mon, 05 Jun 2017 15:12:25 -0500
From: Nico Williams <nico@cryptonector.com>
To: David Noveck <davenoveck@gmail.com>
Cc: "J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@fieldses.org>, Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com>, draft-ietf-nfsv4-xattrs@ietf.org, "nfsv4-chairs@ietf.org" <nfsv4-chairs@ietf.org>, NFSv4 <nfsv4@ietf.org>, Spencer Dawkins at IETF <spencerdawkins.ietf@gmail.com>, The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>
Message-ID: <20170605201224.GI2903@localhost>
References: <CAKKJt-cHEoBeP++YP-=FWmVTWkoLWLa5OZ=sDYT7kEBrDvvOiw@mail.gmail.com> <CABcZeBPc9U1D+sSOnz2_3MwVn527ruuqqWoCsZYafx_rLwpyAQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAKKJt-dcjiMFk0NyD-UrBQrtKAZgWaVzcxY67YSDOu0ZVNw9Ng@mail.gmail.com> <CAKKJt-ceK3r8=HXArenmNXpt8bk2MuKbkPL-qoNPZMrHHETfJg@mail.gmail.com> <20170525152957.GV10188@localhost> <OFE1A7E856.598CE2A7-ON8825812B.00586825-8825812B.0058FAF1@notes.na.collabserv.com> <20170525182246.GW10188@localhost> <20170605183938.GA831@fieldses.org> <20170605185620.GH2903@localhost> <CADaq8jf8XHGgeuBX8Ai2R-gS_i0abR5QT+TVdb7UeOSeDNUVAA@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CADaq8jf8XHGgeuBX8Ai2R-gS_i0abR5QT+TVdb7UeOSeDNUVAA@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/nfsv4/UYr9mA0ggFYPCQETbywwE2IqGao>
Subject: Re: [nfsv4] Eric Rescorla's Discuss on draft-ietf-nfsv4-xattrs-05: (with DISCUSS)
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: Mon, 05 Jun 2017 20:13:01 -0000

On Mon, Jun 05, 2017 at 03:30:00PM -0400, David Noveck wrote:
> > I see a "system xattrs" extension in NFSv4's future.
> 
> I don't and a lot of other people don't but if you want to propose one, you
> can.

It's predictable.  I don't need this.  Someone will.

> > You should at least allow for namespace reservations for system xattrs.
> > I notice you didn't.  Do it now, while you still can!
> 
> As I understand it, the last chance to make this sort of change
> without major disruption to the process was when WGLC ended in
> December 2016.  The review of the document past that point proceeded
> on the understanding that only user xattrs would be supported and that
> fact was an important part of the authors' response to some of the
> security concerns that had been raised during IESG evaluation.

True, but I'm advising ADs here, not just authors.

> > I hope some AD makes that a DISCUSS.
> 
> It didn't happen and the document has been approved.  I'm not sure
> exactly what changes are being awaited before the announcement is sent
> out but I don't expect that a late DISCUSS asking for inclusion of
> system xattrs is among them.

Ah well, too bad.