From: Noveck, Dave (Dave.Noveck@netapp.com)
Date: 02/06/03-11:30:08 AM Z
Subject: RE: [Dan.Oscarsson@kiconsulting.se: Comments on NFSv4 rfc3010bis-05 draft] Date: Thu, 6 Feb 2003 09:30:08 -0800 Message-ID: <C8CF60CFC4D8A74E9945E32CF096548A072A89@SILVER.nane.netapp.com> From: "Noveck, Dave" <Dave.Noveck@netapp.com> I want to separate the two issues. Checking UTF-8 and checking form C. It's my impression that the spec already requires that you check stuff that supposed to be utf-8 and reject it if it isn't valid utf-8. I can't quote a specific statement to that effect but when it says that that's what's valid, my conclusion is that anything else is invalid. In fact, on my bug list (way down, to be sure) is a problem that Peter Astrand's test suite complains that I don't reject a *tag* that doesn't consist of valid UTF-8. As to checking form C, it really doesn't make much difference to me whether the spec requires the server to check it. Saying that the client has to produce correct form C, but that the server doesn't have to check it, with the client getting "weird" results if he uses the wrong form, is not something that I would be prepared to live with. I would wind up checking the normalization rather than having to wonder, in any internationalization situation in which something wierd happened, whether a client with bad normalization was involved. I'm assuming that checking for valid normalization form C is simpler than actually doing the normalization. I'm hoping that for most actual strings processed the execution time will be roughly comparable to just checking UTF-8, even though there will obviously be examples that are considerably more expensive to process. -----Original Message----- From: Jim Rees [mailto:rees@umich.edu] Sent: Thursday, February 06, 2003 12:09 PM To: nfsv4-wg@sunroof.eng.sun.com Subject: Re: [Dan.Oscarsson@kiconsulting.se: Comments on NFSv4 rfc3010bis-05 draft] I would be opposed to requiring the server to check file names for valid UTF-8 form C. Is this really necessary? Unix (and nfs) file systems have never checked file names for validity in the past. This can result in some suprising behavior if the application (or client) misbehave, but I would vote for sticking with tradition on this one.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : 03/04/05-02:12:05 AM Z CST