"recommended" attributes

New Message Reply About this list Date view Thread view Subject view Author view Attachment view

From: Noveck, Dave (Dave.Noveck@netapp.com)
Date: 07/23/01-01:01:35 PM Z


Message-ID: <8C610D86AF6CD4119C9800B0D0499E33335525@red.nane.netapp.com>
From: "Noveck, Dave" <Dave.Noveck@netapp.com>
Subject: "recommended" attributes
Date: Mon, 23 Jul 2001 11:01:35 -0700

It seems to me that recommended attributes started out
as just that: attributes that we recommended that 
servers implement but which we recognized that not
all servers might be able to implement.  The idea
was that it was better for servers to honestly tells us
that no support was available, than to try to pretend
(badly) that support was available.

At some point, we started to add attributes of which
that could not be said (e.g mime-type).  The newly-
proposed attributes also do not seem to be things that
we are not intending to really recommend, but instead
are optional attributes, that some servers might
implement and some clients might look at.

I'm not dead set against such optional attributes,
but we have to recognize that their inclusion 
complicates nfs inter-operability testing (not the 
part that consists of running the connectathon 
tests, however :-).  Since we can add recommended/
optional attributes in a minor version, I think we
should go slow about adding these now.  Let's not add
attributes because they exist in some filesystem
and might at some point be needed.  If a real need
for an attribute arises, we can add it at that point.


New Message Reply About this list Date view Thread view Subject view Author view Attachment view

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : 03/04/05-01:48:58 AM Z CST