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

[James Lentini <[e-mail]>]

On Mon, 8 Nov 2010, Chuck Lever wrote:

> 
> On Nov 4, 2010, at 2:49 PM, James Lentini wrote:
> 
> > 
> > 
> > On Thu, 4 Nov 2010, Chuck Lever wrote:
> > 
> >> 
> >> On Oct 22, 2010, at 1:31 PM, James Lentini wrote:
> >> 
> > <snip>
> >>> 
> >>> Revised text for Section 4.2.1.12 
> >>> (if fedfsAnnotation is retained):
> >>> ------------------------------------------
> >>> 
> >>> 4.2.1.12. fedfsAnnotation
> >>> 
> >>> 
> >>>  A fedfsAnnotation contains an object annotation formatted as a 
> >>>  key/value pair.
> >>> 
> >>>  This attribute is multi-valued; an object type that permits
> >>>  annotations may have any number of annotations per instance.
> >>> 
> >>>  A fedfsAnnotation attribute is a human-readable UTF-8 string.
> >>>  The value MUST NOT contain a non-terminal NUL character and
> >> 
> >> Rob pointed out to me that UTF-8 strings by definition may not have 
> >> a non-terminal NUL character, so the above MUST NOT text is not 
> >> necessary.
> > 
> > Since arriving at this conclusion required some discussion, I think 
> > noting this point would be benefit future readers. The "MUST NOT" 
> > could be removed like this:
> > 
> >   A fedfsAnnotation attribute is a human-readable UTF-8 string.
> >   By definition, the value will not contain a non-terminal NUL character.
> >   The value MUST be formatted according to the following ABNF [RFC 5234]
> >   rules:
> > 
> > Is that better?
> 
> "As a UTF-8 string by definition does not contain a non-terminal NUL character, the annotation value (VAL) can never contain a non-terminal NUL character." might be a little more clear for the second sentence.  I do realize this restriction applies for the entire fedfsAnnotation value, but my issue was specifically around what the intended payload of VAL might contain.
> 
> I still might wish for a fedfsAnnotation format that was less sloppy 
> (ie, easier to parse without worrying about white space variations).  
> Is there any reason to allow such flexibility?

The flexibility allows a person to type a fedfsAnnotation value 
without having to worry about whitespace.

-james