From: Carl Burnett (cburnett@us.ibm.com)
Date: 05/08/03-04:10:40 PM Z
Message-ID: <OFAFDF779E.ABA30902-ON87256D20.0071AED6@us.ibm.com>
From: Carl Burnett <cburnett@us.ibm.com>
Subject: [nfsv4] lease renewal with delegreturn and delegpurge
Date: Thu, 8 May 2003 16:10:40 -0500
From the spec,
<<
The following events cause implicit renewal of all of the leases for
a given client (i.e., all those sharing a given clientid). Each of
these is a positive indication that the client is still active and
that the associated state held at the server, for the client, is
still valid.
o An OPEN with a valid clientid.
o Any operation made with a valid stateid (CLOSE, DELEGPURGE,
DELEGRETURN, LOCK, LOCKU, OPEN, OPEN_CONFIRM, OPEN_DOWNGRADE,
READ, RENEW, SETATTR, WRITE). This does not include the special
stateids of all bits 0 or all bits 1.
>>
DELEGPURGE and RENEW take a clientid4, not a stateid. The purpose of
RENEW is clear. Is it still correct to assume that DELEGPURGE should do
lease renewal using the clientid?
If DELEGURGE is not supported, is it a correct assumption that it still
must handle lease renewal for a valid clientid?
For DELEGRETURN, if a client, in error, does a DELEGRETURN to a server
that has never granted any delegations, what would the correct error be
(NFS4ERR_INVAL??), and should the client's lease be renewed(my vote would
be no)?
Thanks,
Carl
Carl Burnett
AIX Kernel Architecture - Distributed File Systems
(512) 838-8498, TL 678-8498
(please reply to cburnett@us.ibm.com)
_______________________________________________
nfsv4 mailing list
nfsv4@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nfsv4
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : 03/04/05-02:12:22 AM Z CST