IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [nfsv4] Draft RFC for ONC RPC over AF_VSOCK

Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@redhat.com> Thu, 12 October 2017 12:29 UTC

Return-Path: <stefanha@redhat.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 C08CB1344BC for <nfsv4@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 12 Oct 2017 05:29:16 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -5.021
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.021 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_20=-0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 D2R-ZrMuUPSX for <nfsv4@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 12 Oct 2017 05:29:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx1.redhat.com (mx1.redhat.com [209.132.183.28]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 926941344BA for <nfsv4@ietf.org>; Thu, 12 Oct 2017 05:29:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx01.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.11]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0BBDCC059B63; Thu, 12 Oct 2017 12:29:15 +0000 (UTC)
DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mx1.redhat.com 0BBDCC059B63
Authentication-Results: ext-mx08.extmail.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com
Authentication-Results: ext-mx08.extmail.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com; spf=fail smtp.mailfrom=stefanha@redhat.com
Received: from localhost (ovpn-117-130.ams2.redhat.com [10.36.117.130]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 93E15600C0; Thu, 12 Oct 2017 12:29:14 +0000 (UTC)
Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2017 13:08:14 +0100
From: Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@redhat.com>
To: Matt Benjamin <mbenjami@redhat.com>
Cc: Linux NFS Mailing List <linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org>, NFSv4 <nfsv4@ietf.org>
Message-ID: <20171012120814.GB5957@stefanha-x1.localdomain>
References: <20171005200835.GA31525@stefanha-x1.localdomain> <CAKOnarmreQp6c8qM7x=ohGf1sAoj53qbE0bNvKxzyWLiS=2zKw@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CAKOnarmreQp6c8qM7x=ohGf1sAoj53qbE0bNvKxzyWLiS=2zKw@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.0 (2017-09-02)
X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.79 on 10.5.11.11
X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.5.16 (mx1.redhat.com [10.5.110.32]); Thu, 12 Oct 2017 12:29:15 +0000 (UTC)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/nfsv4/q_kYuMyFyjAqGzVO6_JWB0l95fo>
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Thu, 12 Oct 2017 06:57:42 -0700
Subject: Re: [nfsv4] Draft RFC for ONC RPC over AF_VSOCK
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, 12 Oct 2017 12:29:17 -0000

On Thu, Oct 05, 2017 at 04:50:55PM -0400, Matt Benjamin wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 5, 2017 at 4:08 PM, Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@redhat.com> wrote:
> > I have previously submitted patches that implement NFS client and nfsd
> > support for the AF_VSOCK address family.  In order for this to be
> > acceptable for merge the AF_VSOCK transport needs to be defined in an
> > IETF RFC.  Below is a draft RFC that defines ONC RPC over AF_VSOCK.
> >
> > My patches use netid "vsock" but "tcpv" has also been suggested.  This draft
> > RFC still uses "vsock" but I'll update it to "tcpv" if there is consensus.
> >
> 
> I think "vsock" is the appropriate netid, not "tcpv."  Stream
> orientation, if anything, is the general category containing TCP and
> VSOCK, not the reverse.  But really I think it's just more clear.
> 
> I think this draft needs to be sent to the IETF NFSv4 working group
> alias, nfsv4@ietf.org.

Thanks.  Will send the next revision properly formatted to the NFSv4
working group.

Stefan

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email