Re: [nfsv4] RFC 7530: Available attributes for READDIR and Absent File Systems

David Noveck <davenoveck@gmail.com> Mon, 22 May 2017 11:42 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 81EB4129C16 for <nfsv4@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 22 May 2017 04:42:17 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.999
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 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, 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 IATpUypE8KCi for <nfsv4@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 22 May 2017 04:42:16 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-it0-x22a.google.com (mail-it0-x22a.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c0b::22a]) (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 38EA712704A for <nfsv4@ietf.org>; Mon, 22 May 2017 04:42:16 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-it0-x22a.google.com with SMTP id c15so149959551ith.0 for <nfsv4@ietf.org>; Mon, 22 May 2017 04:42:16 -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=vmkdkGRpwHpur3aQBeCqNobf6AKruuyAbJS9x5xo2RE=; b=TJaDBULbevfoYnIQXTgSQalL7klV5QOhCCwbaQ9iZcsn1s8DzpSkMgOMsTy/0BU/Qy 19roOTMCI207PtzYTvOdRQpNQHxQb1dHZeAsaUspmZkTx0eKOc08LyRRlZiVxeYUB6iq zXr/ZmqdpjpAo8Ud2txS/mE/tUnwRT0LLFNZ4a8p6NclvzAJVIRofpacSHrCL8SzoT0D MMaYPdGbwLAPTe1Q6Q2vMAcYvT9h2QHouyA7zEGPwVw1pj5MjC7+2kSN936De9W/wmoy QkMFpMN1Nk5LrAzoojGQWA4aQ7AwFqG1+tNOY/HivKDX+YJ+6fMdRSrFBeKBzMFB72Bf LopQ==
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=vmkdkGRpwHpur3aQBeCqNobf6AKruuyAbJS9x5xo2RE=; b=WiMBgtZDtfANSj8mk7t9Vewo8kJQZu78K6qyGIVRNH76oi51J7BjjOUyb7GDkile2t L1KnwgPrYiU/+E0D0Od2SS2Z9wUr8z619YgBfceKL+hAjS2r6Vs5bNHeWNydizwgU1L9 f+rnvQyZvI/YLP0dy+UXuZKebJLJgcuQQq124jzogwj2TgU2cijMwpWLOODM4N1OsxFM BVQ048ebTSRIN+aQrqZGCx9ZX4jR5iYJ5Wj1VuZesBWsZAKBYmkwkSzonjjuzohZVT3B Ua9QeiAzKvYGYFpGcfEM2qD6wwWw3GGpwv93glIb+9Y+mVWVXTj3LM1iw1vlRzDno3IW HY7A==
X-Gm-Message-State: AODbwcCfhN/XRy0CuORj2vYnQqOh2xZG0SOHlyu1ePkQNNZaUo8hNcz0 xkYzADZwy7/i+EpuySeVaHUKMJeKRA==
X-Received: by 10.36.137.212 with SMTP id s203mr40976899itd.57.1495453335460; Mon, 22 May 2017 04:42:15 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.107.4.148 with HTTP; Mon, 22 May 2017 04:42:14 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <E8E85727-DF56-4BC4-9B1D-8BFC5139B5A1@gmail.com>
References: <03970226-9CF0-4493-9408-F7CBC19F3919@gmail.com> <CADaq8jdttJ=2Ej-vsi6go2puPec5=pyf5aC60URaEgFzOA=daA@mail.gmail.com> <E8E85727-DF56-4BC4-9B1D-8BFC5139B5A1@gmail.com>
From: David Noveck <davenoveck@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 22 May 2017 07:42:14 -0400
Message-ID: <CADaq8jeYK8xPFb3kBUnSQ-2k=E53NfmJ6f6sBVTYifa6PXja7Q@mail.gmail.com>
To: Vitaliy Gusev <gusev.vitaliy@gmail.com>
Cc: "nfsv4@ietf.org" <nfsv4@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="94eb2c05f6a0d6ae4a05501b5c0c"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/nfsv4/oreKml38gI0maan4iqtZOsLtuXM>
Subject: Re: [nfsv4] RFC 7530: Available attributes for READDIR and Absent File Systems
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, 22 May 2017 11:42:17 -0000

> In other words, can other attributes than fs_locations, fsid,
mounted_on_fileid, rdattr_error
> be available for a root of absent filesystem in READDIR reply?

According to the spec. yes.  Realistically, it is hard to come up with a
case where the server would have this information or in which a client
would be prepared to do anything with it.

On Sun, May 21, 2017 at 7:05 PM, Vitaliy Gusev <gusev.vitaliy@gmail.com>
wrote:

>
> On 21 May 2017, at 22:26, David Noveck <davenoveck@gmail.com> wrote:
> …
> The other relevant case for READDIR is one in which the operation is being
> done in a directory within a present file system and some of objects within
> the directory are the roots of absent file systems.  Given that context,
> the document could have been clearer if it had mentioned fsid and
> mounted_on_filled which need to be provided  (it is a SHOULD) for GETATTR.
> At the time RFC7530 was done we could have made these "SHOULD"s as they are
> for GETATTR but we didn't do that since this is not a very important case
> and the client has the option to follow up with GETATTR.
>
> As it is, the server MAY return these attributes.  If one is doing a
> server-side implementation, it is best to to provide them since they need
> to be available for GETATTR.  On the other hand, if one is doing a
> client-side implementation, you can’t assume they will be present and need
> to be prepared to follow up with an OTW GETATTR (which has to specify
> fs_locations to prevent it from being rejected).
>
>
> So you specify case when server can return READDIR the same or lesser
> quantity of attributes as GETATTR
> returns. This case is reasonable.
>
> But what if list of attributes returned by READDIR for root of absent
> filesystem is more widely than GETATTR returns?
> In other words, can other attributes than fs_locations, fsid,
> mounted_on_fileid, rdattr_error
> be available for a root of absent filesystem in READDIR reply?
>
> ———
> Thanks,
> Vitaliy Gusev
>
>