IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [nfsv4] [FedFS] Meeting Minutes, 9/16/2010

Robert Thurlow <Robert.Thurlow@oracle.com> Tue, 21 September 2010 14:44 UTC

Return-Path: <Robert.Thurlow@oracle.com>
X-Original-To: nfsv4@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: nfsv4@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3B3C728C0FE for <nfsv4@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 21 Sep 2010 07:44:57 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id v7zX1ukNm7aB for <nfsv4@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 21 Sep 2010 07:44:56 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rcsinet10.oracle.com (rcsinet10.oracle.com [148.87.113.121]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 26F7028C0F0 for <nfsv4@ietf.org>; Tue, 21 Sep 2010 07:44:56 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from acsinet15.oracle.com (acsinet15.oracle.com [141.146.126.227]) by rcsinet10.oracle.com (Switch-3.4.2/Switch-3.4.2) with ESMTP id o8LEjJ6N006112 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Tue, 21 Sep 2010 14:45:20 GMT
Received: from acsmt353.oracle.com (acsmt353.oracle.com [141.146.40.153]) by acsinet15.oracle.com (Switch-3.4.2/Switch-3.4.1) with ESMTP id o8L61IOF014572; Tue, 21 Sep 2010 14:45:19 GMT
Received: from abhmt016.oracle.com by acsmt355.oracle.com with ESMTP id 623473081285080293; Tue, 21 Sep 2010 07:44:53 -0700
Received: from [10.7.250.62] (/10.7.250.62) by default (Oracle Beehive Gateway v4.0) with ESMTP ; Tue, 21 Sep 2010 07:44:52 -0700
Message-ID: <4C98C4BF.5040408@oracle.com>
Date: Tue, 21 Sep 2010 08:44:15 -0600
From: Robert Thurlow <Robert.Thurlow@oracle.com>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.16 (X11/20080811)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: James Lentini <jlentini@netapp.com>
References: <alpine.LFD.2.00.1009161441300.21841@jlentini-linux.nane.netapp.com> <4C97767A.4000506@oracle.com> <alpine.LFD.2.00.1009211033340.21841@jlentini-linux.nane.netapp.com>
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LFD.2.00.1009211033340.21841@jlentini-linux.nane.netapp.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: nfsv4@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [nfsv4] [FedFS] Meeting Minutes, 9/16/2010
X-BeenThere: nfsv4@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: NFSv4 Working Group <nfsv4.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nfsv4>, <mailto:nfsv4-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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: Tue, 21 Sep 2010 14:44:57 -0000

James Lentini wrote:

>> Should this not be FEDFS_ERR_LDAP_REFERRAL?
> 
> The other LDAP related error values use a prefix of "FEDFS_ERR_NSDB_": 
> FEDFS_ERR_NSDB_LDAP and FEDFS_ERR_NSDB_LDAP_VAL. 
> FEDFS_ERR_NSDB_REFERRAL seemed to fit in that naming scheme. I think 
> FEDFS_ERR_NSDB_LDAP_REFERRAL would also make sense.
> 
> Does naming this error FEDFS_ERR_NSDB_LDAP_REFERRAL sound better or 
> worse?

Better to me - I could see someone thinking of NFS referrals
without the "LDAP" in the error code.

Rob T

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email