Re: [nfsv4] Global namespace for v4.1?

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

From: Brent Callaghan (brent@eng.sun.com)
Date: 12/23/03-12:03:34 PM Z


Message-ID: <3FE88376.7010107@eng.sun.com>
From: Brent Callaghan <brent@eng.sun.com>
Subject: Re: [nfsv4] Global namespace for v4.1?
Date: Tue, 23 Dec 2003 10:03:34 -0800

Noveck, Dave wrote:
>>To answer the various forms of the question, "Why allow
>>clients to lookup the global namespace?"
> 
> 
> I don't think that really was the question.  I don't think I've
> said that clients should be banned from interrogating this name
> service, when it exists and is standardized.  I can't recall 
> anyone else saying that either.  I think the question is, what
> is the wisest thing for (v4) clients to do and for v4 clients, I
> haven't heard anyone give any reason why getting referrals from
> the v4 server is not the best strategy.  The big advantage is
> that it can be done now and when the repository is standardized,
> your work has already been done.

It has been suggested that the server is lacking client context
information that might be important in server selection, e.g.
does this client need the filesystem with Linux or Windows executables ?
Or, does this this client need the replica server in the next room
or in Key West ?  Some decisions on filesystem selection are best
made by the client.


>>	3) The global namespace must handle servers that are not
>>	   NFSv4 and thus cannot refer clients.  Given the adoption
>>	   rate of customers there will be NFSv3-only servers for a
>>	   long time and they will not be restricted to terminal
>>	   leafs in the tree.  
> 
> 
> Maybe I'm not understanding what you are saying here, but if I am,
> I find this kind of disturbing.

You may be reading too much into this.  My interpretation is simply
that a global namespace that depends on v4 referrals will force
customers to install a network of v4 referral servers to provide
access to their established base of v2/v3 servers.

Seems better to start with the assumption of a version-neutral
(or even protocol-neutral) namespace and add v4 referrals as an
optimization.

	Brent


_______________________________________________
nfsv4 mailing list
nfsv4@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nfsv4


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 : 03/04/05-02:13:03 AM Z CST