From: Stevan Steve Allen (scallen@us.ibm.com)
Date: 12/19/02-04:30:42 PM Z
Subject: Implementation Forum (was: re: V4 complexity) Message-ID: <OFED44B0CA.F559D5F2-ON88256C94.00603BE3@us.ibm.com> From: Stevan Steve Allen <scallen@us.ibm.com> Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2002 14:30:42 -0800 >David Robinson wrote: >>Spencer Shepler wrote: >> On Thu, Stevan Steve Allen wrote: >>>Dave Noveck wrote: >>>>This might be something for that never-quite-started implementation RFC. >>> >>>Could we start an implementation forum for collecting this info? >>>Peferably on this server. >> >> >> What form do we want this to be in? A traditional FAQ? Something else? > >We should use an Internet-Draft (individual?) as the format. I see the fact that >they time out as a feature, if no one cares enough to maintain it >it should just go away. Eventually it becomes an Informational RFC >after the change rate diminishes. > >The only difference between an ID and an FAQ, is document >structure. So just do the right thing from the start. Being a little new and not familiar with the various structures.. difficulties or limitations, I was thinking of collecting the info (see if there is interest & the type of topics which are useful) in a simple open discussion forum and then figure out what we have to organize, life expectancy... I see some info needing to stay around as various platforms may start their v4 development in different quarters or years. For usable information, o I am interested in collecting conditions each server platform may overload each returned error, and how each client platform treats the returned error. o Discuss and collect a set of guidelines for each procedure including multiple version interaction. An crude example guideline "may" state in the case of a client restart with both NLM & V4 sessions to the same host the client will send both an sm notify and set client id to the remote host. The server upon receiving one, or the other, should not assume both. This describes the case where the client lockd restarted (sm_notify) but client v4 sessions are unaffected (prior v4 client id is still in use). Would a open discussion forum, like this one I'm posting to, accompany the ID or FAQ?
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : 03/04/05-01:50:43 AM Z CST