From: Richard Sharpe (rsharpe@richardsharpe.com)
Date: 05/14/03-11:21:32 AM Z
From: Richard Sharpe <rsharpe@richardsharpe.com> Subject: RE: [nfsv4] Clarification on READ with an all bits 1 stateid Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.33.0305140920160.3446-100000@ns.aus.com> Date: Wed, 14 May 2003 09:21:32 -0700 (PDT) On Wed, 14 May 2003, Noveck, Dave wrote: > I agree this would be a lot more elegant than the all bits > 1 approach (although not mainly because it itself is all that > elegant :-). > > I think you could break tis up into two pieces that might be > implemented independently. > > The first piece is simply to designate outside the protocol > some server-specific mechanism (e.g. mount option) a specific > user having this property. It isn't clear whether that is > allowed in the current spec (as part of the server's fs semantics). > If it isn't this could be changed in v4.1. Even if it is, > clarification of this area in v4.1 would be helpful. Hmmm, this looks a lot like privileges from (gasp) VMS, or VMS++, or capabilities from ... Long live bypass. Regards ----- Richard Sharpe, rsharpe[at]ns.aus.com, rsharpe[at]samba.org, sharpe[at]ethereal.com, http://www.richardsharpe.com _______________________________________________ nfsv4 mailing list nfsv4@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nfsv4
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : 03/04/05-02:12:25 AM Z CST