IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [nfsv4] FW: New Version Notification for draft-faibish-nfsv4-pnfs-block-disk-protection-01.txt

<david.black@emc.com> Thu, 07 July 2011 19:23 UTC

Return-Path: <david.black@emc.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 86A2E21F88E6 for <nfsv4@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 7 Jul 2011 12:23:42 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -105.667
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-105.667 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.932, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id XVkkklqFemZx for <nfsv4@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 7 Jul 2011 12:23:42 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mexforward.lss.emc.com (mexforward.lss.emc.com [128.222.32.20]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7796221F88E0 for <nfsv4@ietf.org>; Thu, 7 Jul 2011 12:23:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from hop04-l1d11-si01.isus.emc.com (HOP04-L1D11-SI01.isus.emc.com [10.254.111.54]) by mexforward.lss.emc.com (Switch-3.4.3/Switch-3.4.3) with ESMTP id p67JNeqU006053 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Thu, 7 Jul 2011 15:23:40 -0400
Received: from mailhub.lss.emc.com (mailhub.lss.emc.com [10.254.221.251]) by hop04-l1d11-si01.isus.emc.com (RSA Interceptor); Thu, 7 Jul 2011 15:23:29 -0400
Received: from mxhub05.corp.emc.com (mxhub05.corp.emc.com [128.221.46.113]) by mailhub.lss.emc.com (Switch-3.4.3/Switch-3.4.3) with ESMTP id p67JLpeg031463; Thu, 7 Jul 2011 15:21:51 -0400
Received: from mx14a.corp.emc.com ([169.254.1.245]) by mxhub05.corp.emc.com ([128.221.46.113]) with mapi; Thu, 7 Jul 2011 15:21:50 -0400
From: david.black@emc.com
To: sshepler@microsoft.com
Date: Thu, 07 Jul 2011 15:21:48 -0400
Thread-Topic: [nfsv4] FW: New Version Notification for draft-faibish-nfsv4-pnfs-block-disk-protection-01.txt
Thread-Index: AQHMPMzEItXlWF0fnEmmQvqc/labQ5ThNfuwgAAGDfA=
Message-ID: <7C4DFCE962635144B8FAE8CA11D0BF1E0589392B28@MX14A.corp.emc.com>
References: <7C4DFCE962635144B8FAE8CA11D0BF1E0589392870@MX14A.corp.emc.com> <4E15C1B5.5070600@tonian.com> <op.vx8679iyunckof@usensfaibisl2e.eng.emc.com> <1746881557-1310051155-cardhu_decombobulator_blackberry.rim.net-585899366-@b27.c3.bise3.blackberry> <7C4DFCE962635144B8FAE8CA11D0BF1E0589392A9A@MX14A.corp.emc.com> <4E15E259.2090208@tonian.com> <20110707170428.GA26714@merit.edu> <CAP_8SaeM5fn7uLXoOU8XsQ4hdRZP=eLXhi7p51kaFHDOyJ7uyQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAP_8SacPC9nSMOe_jtjpWaP6Vv2ouQf+Fgi7wmBNpWehDJR0hw@mail.gmail.com> <E043D9D8EE3B5743B8B174A814FD584F1FDC0E14@TK5EX14MBXC124.redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
In-Reply-To: <E043D9D8EE3B5743B8B174A814FD584F1FDC0E14@TK5EX14MBXC124.redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
acceptlanguage: en-US
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-EMM-MHVC: 1
Cc: nfsv4@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [nfsv4] FW: New Version Notification for draft-faibish-nfsv4-pnfs-block-disk-protection-01.txt
X-BeenThere: nfsv4@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
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: <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, 07 Jul 2011 19:23:42 -0000

> Finally, if there exist two block pNFS implementations, wouldn’t
> there be a desire (potentially) to have a different GUID value for
> each?

No.  The goal is to have a single GUID that can be used by all pNFS block
implementations to enable operating systems to prevent non-pNFS access to
devices used for block pNFS data.  Actual claiming of a pNFS block device
for use with a particular implementation happens via the pNFS protocol,
but that can't be used early in an OS boot sequence.

Thanks,
--David
----------------------------------------------------
David L. Black, Distinguished Engineer
EMC Corporation, 176 South St., Hopkinton, MA  01748
+1 (508) 293-7953             FAX: +1 (508) 293-7786
david.black@emc.com        Mobile: +1 (978) 394-7754
----------------------------------------------------

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email