Re: [nfsv4] NFSv4.2 status
Spencer Shepler <sshepler@microsoft.com> Thu, 09 September 2010 17:05 UTC
Return-Path: <sshepler@microsoft.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 42D783A68FA for <nfsv4@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 9 Sep 2010 10:05:36 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -10.322
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.322 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.277, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8]
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 esyIR8OU89Lc for <nfsv4@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 9 Sep 2010 10:05:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtp.microsoft.com (smtp.microsoft.com [131.107.115.212]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3A8F83A68A0 for <nfsv4@ietf.org>; Thu, 9 Sep 2010 10:05:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from TK5EX14MLTC103.redmond.corp.microsoft.com (157.54.79.174) by TK5-EXGWY-E801.partners.extranet.microsoft.com (10.251.56.50) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 8.2.176.0; Thu, 9 Sep 2010 10:06:02 -0700
Received: from TK5EX14MBXC126.redmond.corp.microsoft.com ([169.254.11.142]) by TK5EX14MLTC103.redmond.corp.microsoft.com ([157.54.79.174]) with mapi id 14.01.0218.010; Thu, 9 Sep 2010 10:06:02 -0700
From: Spencer Shepler <sshepler@microsoft.com>
To: "nfsv4@ietf.org" <nfsv4@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [nfsv4] NFSv4.2 status
Thread-Index: AQHLT9rdFwmRFnR1yEWGw/FKKaBau5MJ2Ohg
Date: Thu, 09 Sep 2010 17:06:01 +0000
Message-ID: <E043D9D8EE3B5743B8B174A814FD584F09C3C65C@TK5EX14MBXC126.redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
References: <37A583D1-046A-47D8-8EBA-C08224602F64@netapp.com>
In-Reply-To: <37A583D1-046A-47D8-8EBA-C08224602F64@netapp.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [157.54.51.76]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: [nfsv4] NFSv4.2 status
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: Thu, 09 Sep 2010 17:05:36 -0000
> -----Original Message----- > From: nfsv4-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:nfsv4-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf > Of Thomas Haynes > Sent: Wednesday, September 08, 2010 9:52 PM > To: nfsv4@ietf.org > Subject: [nfsv4] NFSv4.2 status > > In reviewing for the meeting tomorrow, I just went over the notes from > Maastricht and I was wondering where we were with regards to NFSv4.2? As the result of the discussion/review of the draft-faibish-nfsv4-pnfs-access-permissions-check draft, it will become a -00 working group draft on next update. Given this, these changes are the near term candidate for an NFSv4.2. I will be working with our ADs on milestone/date updates based on the next couple of design-group concalls (fedfs and nfsv4.0bis). There is obviously interest in other additions given the drafts in existence for server side copy, space reservation, and pathless objects. If one or more of those gain interest, activity, support, then we'll move forward with them. It appears that a vector of support is forming behind virtualization support. My preference is that we move where there is interest/energy so progress can be readily made. Spencer
- [nfsv4] NFSv4.2 status Thomas Haynes
- Re: [nfsv4] NFSv4.2 status david.noveck
- Re: [nfsv4] NFSv4.2 status Spencer Shepler
- Re: [nfsv4] NFSv4.2 status David P. Quigley