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

David Noveck <davenoveck@gmail.com> Thu, 24 August 2017 17:46 UTC

Return-Path: <davenoveck@gmail.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 C6476120721 for <nfsv4@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 24 Aug 2017 10:46:14 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.699
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.699 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.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 pF5F0h1k8E7d for <nfsv4@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 24 Aug 2017 10:46:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-io0-x22b.google.com (mail-io0-x22b.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c06::22b]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DCAC0124B18 for <nfsv4@ietf.org>; Thu, 24 Aug 2017 10:46:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-io0-x22b.google.com with SMTP id d81so530562ioj.4 for <nfsv4@ietf.org>; Thu, 24 Aug 2017 10:46:12 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=fXDyE6m7K7YgM3O/Vac7IkWzwHnWmB44tIb4EEOitv4=; b=Krqr48vY8kKMiGbmzdUQt6cleURXo+qPfZ/sV/2Ta9agbIpKX0V+qsQaFdnN2G7MBr fqm1H0WkqdWkHbsl34BU4tikptg2z/XJnxqG0lqTrEc8qiaLAcMdY5GvS2OuhXhzBN8J hoGdWoVwBWHAL/rc0IesMjUH5mpPv8HVNMTOsvOX2DjtC1Qkeu4cbjAzCWjEYY2VGuKb QH5wS2SLGWSLfO3VLB0IlOBIkMbYYyBRMlLsE7M3kBY7RBWEky4Jj4lK1uisscZV7qlj 9CetEn5Y3Xt+hOiEObg5dqSdjIaZvTsQNNuSRfxPuFP8qwIZCtEltZmPYbZ3kZkIfbkO KxWQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=fXDyE6m7K7YgM3O/Vac7IkWzwHnWmB44tIb4EEOitv4=; b=fKYfLqygCDbFdu84hQTV6FtMQ9ZzxX3897oP4HFWZlIL9ErT3T2thTcuzfwWtp1aKG 8QYjuwWSkPa4JTSrJAK4o7heOpEqLiVgZ9SNb+385W3qR6BI93YrJx/wGYw1dRtfsWDx ef0gXfLAE8zyvRoExAOkW8PdpKCEklvRw06Eiu7bNHd+ep+RvkJR68i7aLsqpsI8W/E5 9Yd80cS+jpxFJ6sNnUfGgISQdhh7GTytB8h6IRjM+I/WkzY0K1+JkcLyJ4fjGhGl7Tq6 i/BNgI2eqCmkqsaeab+p0q/h8ssb3ZjDMid5MN49dHZar2ryUgGRM7ioa9kRyU8EReiC 8h3Q==
X-Gm-Message-State: AHYfb5jGiKGzX/hPRhgw64+07QvxOtye/kvmpQsCfMETDZ5Pvp32Vnh9 dKJD3XwSZ+rG4x02BNvMg0kDCn+h6A==
X-Received: by 10.107.195.73 with SMTP id t70mr6650664iof.55.1503596772029; Thu, 24 Aug 2017 10:46:12 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.107.10.213 with HTTP; Thu, 24 Aug 2017 10:46:11 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <20170824164508.GA21609@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>
From: David Noveck <davenoveck@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2017 13:46:11 -0400
Message-ID: <CADaq8jdv9thBKqBViR=SEgbiUDe7c3kB_rpbB3w_F43sNFV9Yg@mail.gmail.com>
To: "J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@fieldses.org>
Cc: Thomas Haynes <loghyr@primarydata.com>, hch <hch@lst.de>, "nfsv4@ietf.org" <nfsv4@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="94eb2c18a6747b80db05578367ff"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/nfsv4/XUk-3HF3wR5v_77qE7KlGrHklJs>
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: Thu, 24 Aug 2017 17:46:15 -0000

> 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.
>