Extending the Opening of Files in NFSv4.2
draft-ietf-nfsv4-delstid-08
The information below is for an old version of the document that is already published as an RFC.
| Document | Type |
This is an older version of an Internet-Draft that was ultimately published as RFC 9754.
|
|
|---|---|---|---|
| Authors | Thomas Haynes , Trond Myklebust | ||
| Last updated | 2025-03-26 (Latest revision 2024-10-02) | ||
| RFC stream | Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) | ||
| Intended RFC status | Proposed Standard | ||
| Formats | |||
| Reviews |
ARTART IETF Last Call review
(of
-06)
by Henry Thompson
Ready w/issues
|
||
| Additional resources | Mailing list discussion | ||
| Stream | WG state | Submitted to IESG for Publication | |
| Document shepherd | Christopher Inacio | ||
| Shepherd write-up | Show Last changed 2024-05-28 | ||
| IESG | IESG state | Became RFC 9754 (Proposed Standard) | |
| Action Holders |
(None)
|
||
| Consensus boilerplate | Yes | ||
| Telechat date | (None) | ||
| Responsible AD | Zaheduzzaman Sarker | ||
| Send notices to | inacio@cert.org | ||
| IANA | IANA review state | IANA OK - No Actions Needed | |
| IANA action state | No IANA Actions |
draft-ietf-nfsv4-delstid-08
Network File System Version 4 T. Haynes
Internet-Draft T. Myklebust
Intended status: Standards Track Hammerspace
Expires: 5 April 2025 2 October 2024
Extending the Opening of Files in NFSv4.2
draft-ietf-nfsv4-delstid-08
Abstract
The Network File System v4 (NFSv4) allows a client to both open a
file and be granted a delegation of that file. This delegation
provides the client the right to authoritatively cache metadata on
the file locally. This document presents several extensions for both
the opening and delegating of the file to the client. This document
extends NFSv4.2 (see RFC7863).
Note
This note is to be removed before publishing as an RFC.
Discussion of this draft takes place on the NFSv4 working group
mailing list (nfsv4@ietf.org), which is archived at
https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/nfsv4/. Working Group
information can be found at https://datatracker.ietf.org/wg/nfsv4/
about/.
Status of This Memo
This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute
working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-
Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
This Internet-Draft will expire on 5 April 2025.
Haynes & Myklebust Expires 5 April 2025 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft Deleg Stateid October 2024
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2024 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved.
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents (https://trustee.ietf.org/
license-info) in effect on the date of publication of this document.
Please review these documents carefully, as they describe your rights
and restrictions with respect to this document. Code Components
extracted from this document must include Revised BSD License text as
described in Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions and are
provided without warranty as described in the Revised BSD License.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
1.1. Definitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
1.2. Requirements Language . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2. Offline Files . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
2.1. XDR for Offline Attribute . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
3. Determining OPEN Feature Support . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
3.1. XDR for Open Arguments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
4. OPEN grants only one of Open or Delegation Stateid . . . . . 7
4.1. Implementation Experience . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
5. Proxying of Times . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
5.1. Use case: NFSv3 client proxy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
5.2. XDR for Proxying of Times . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
6. Extraction of XDR . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
7. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
8. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
9. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
9.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
Appendix A. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
1. Introduction
In the Network File System version4 (NFSv4), a client may be granted
a delegation for a file (see Section 1.8.4 of [RFC8881]). This
allows the client to act as the authority for the file's metadata and
data. This document presents a number of extensions which enhance
the functionality of opens and delegations. These allow the client
to:
* detect an offline file, which may require significant effort to
obtain.
Haynes & Myklebust Expires 5 April 2025 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft Deleg Stateid October 2024
* determine which extensions of OPEN (see Section 18.16 of
[RFC8881]) flags are supported by the server.
* during the OPEN procedure, retrieve either the open stateid (see
Section 8.2 of [RFC8881]) or delegation stateid, but not both
simultaneously.
* cache both the access and modify timestamps, thereby reducing the
frequency with which the client must query the server for this
information.
Using the process detailed in [RFC8178], the revisions in this
document become an extension of NFSv4.2 [RFC7862]. They are built on
top of the external data representation (XDR) [RFC4506] generated
from [RFC7863].
1.1. Definitions
offline file: A file which exists on a device which is not connected
to the server. There is typically a cost associated with bringing
the file to an online status. Historically this would be a file
on tape media and the cost would have been finding and loading the
tape. A more modern interpretation is that the file is in the
cloud and the cost is a monetary one in downloading the file.
proxy: Proxying of attributes occurs when a client has the
authority, as granted by the appropriate delegation, to represent
the attributes normally maintained by the server. For read
attributes, this occurs when the client has either a read or write
delegations for the file. For write attributes, this occurs when
the client has a write delegation for the file. The client having
this authority is the "proxy" for those attributes.
1.2. Requirements Language
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and
"OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in
BCP 14 [RFC2119] [RFC8174] when, and only when, they appear in all
capitals, as shown here.
Haynes & Myklebust Expires 5 April 2025 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft Deleg Stateid October 2024
2. Offline Files
If a file is offline, then the server has immediate high-performance
access to the file's attributes, but not to the file's content. The
action of retrieving the data content is expensive, to the extent
that the content should only be retrieved if it is going to be used.
For example, a graphical file manager (such as OSX's Finder) may want
to access the beginning of the file to preview it for an user who is
hovering their pointer over the file name and not accessing it
otherwise. If the file is retrieved, it will most likely either be
immediately thrown away or returned.
A compound (see Section 2.3 of [RFC8881]) with a GETATTR (see
Section 18.7 of [RFC8881]) or READDIR (see Section 18.23 of
[RFC8881]) can report the file's attributes without bringing the file
online. However, either an OPEN or a LAYOUTGET (see Section 18.43 of
[RFC8881]) might cause the file server to retrieve the archived data
contents, bringing the file online. For non-parallel NFS (pNFS)
systems (see Section 12 of [RFC8881]) , the OPEN operation requires a
filehandle to the data content. For pNFS systems, the filehandle
retrieved from an OPEN need not cause the data content to be
retrieved. But when the LAYOUTGET operation is processed, a layout
type specific mapping will cause the data content to be retrieved
from offline storage.
If the client is not aware that the file is offline, it might
inadvertently open the file to determine what type of file it is
accessing. By interrogating the new attribute fattr4_offline, a
client can predetermine the availability of the file, avoiding the
need to open it at all. Being offline might also involve situations
in which the file is archived in the cloud, i.e., there can be an
expense in both retrieving the file to bring online and in sending
the file back to offline status.
2.1. XDR for Offline Attribute
<CODE BEGINS>
///
/// typedef bool fattr4_offline;
///
///
/// const FATTR4_OFFLINE = 83;
///
<CODE ENDS>
Haynes & Myklebust Expires 5 April 2025 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft Deleg Stateid October 2024
3. Determining OPEN Feature Support
[RFC8178] (see Section 4.4.2) allows for extending a particular minor
version of the NFSv4 protocol without requiring the definition of a
new minor version. The client can probe the capabilities of the
server and based on the result, determine if both it and the server
support optional features not previously specified as part of the
minor version.
The fattr4_open_arguments attribute is a new XDR extension which
provides helpful support when the OPEN procedure is extended in such
a fashion. It models all of the parameters via bitmap4 data
structures, which allows for the addition of a new flag to any of the
OPEN arguments (see Section 18.16.1 of [RFC8881]). The scope of this
attribute applies to all objects with a matching fsid.
Two new flags are provided:
* OPEN4_SHARE_ACCESS_WANT_OPEN_XOR_DELEGATION (see Section 4)
* OPEN4_SHARE_ACCESS_WANT_DELEG_TIMESTAMPS (see Section 5)
Subsequent extensions can use this framework when introducing new
OPTIONAL functionality to OPEN, by creating a new flag for each
OPTIONAL parameter.
Since fattr4_open_arguments is a RECOMMENDED attribute, if the server
informs the client via NFS4ERR_ATTRNOTSUPP that it does not support
this new attribute, the client MUST take this to mean that the
additional new OPTIONAL functionality to OPEN is also not supported.
Some other concerns are how to process both currently REQUIRED flags
and OPTIONAL flags which become REQUIRED in the future. The server
MUST mark REQUIRED flags as being supported. Note that these flags
MUST only change from OPTIONAL to REQUIRED when the NFSv4 minor
version is incremented.
3.1. XDR for Open Arguments
<CODE BEGINS>
///
/// struct open_arguments4 {
/// bitmap4 oa_share_access;
/// bitmap4 oa_share_deny;
/// bitmap4 oa_share_access_want;
/// bitmap4 oa_open_claim;
/// bitmap4 oa_create_mode;
/// };
Haynes & Myklebust Expires 5 April 2025 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft Deleg Stateid October 2024
///
///
/// enum open_args_share_access4 {
/// OPEN_ARGS_SHARE_ACCESS_READ = 1,
/// OPEN_ARGS_SHARE_ACCESS_WRITE = 2,
/// OPEN_ARGS_SHARE_ACCESS_BOTH = 3
/// };
///
///
/// enum open_args_share_deny4 {
/// OPEN_ARGS_SHARE_DENY_NONE = 0,
/// OPEN_ARGS_SHARE_DENY_READ = 1,
/// OPEN_ARGS_SHARE_DENY_WRITE = 2,
/// OPEN_ARGS_SHARE_DENY_BOTH = 3
/// };
///
///
/// enum open_args_share_access_want4 {
/// OPEN_ARGS_SHARE_ACCESS_WANT_ANY_DELEG = 3,
/// OPEN_ARGS_SHARE_ACCESS_WANT_NO_DELEG = 4,
/// OPEN_ARGS_SHARE_ACCESS_WANT_CANCEL = 5,
/// OPEN_ARGS_SHARE_ACCESS_WANT_SIGNAL_DELEG_WHEN_RESRC_AVAIL
/// = 17,
/// OPEN_ARGS_SHARE_ACCESS_WANT_PUSH_DELEG_WHEN_UNCONTENDED
/// = 18,
/// OPEN_ARGS_SHARE_ACCESS_WANT_DELEG_TIMESTAMPS = 20,
/// OPEN_ARGS_SHARE_ACCESS_WANT_OPEN_XOR_DELEGATION = 21
/// };
///
///
/// enum open_args_open_claim4 {
/// OPEN_ARGS_OPEN_CLAIM_NULL = 0,
/// OPEN_ARGS_OPEN_CLAIM_PREVIOUS = 1,
/// OPEN_ARGS_OPEN_CLAIM_DELEGATE_CUR = 2,
/// OPEN_ARGS_OPEN_CLAIM_DELEGATE_PREV = 3,
/// OPEN_ARGS_OPEN_CLAIM_FH = 4,
/// OPEN_ARGS_OPEN_CLAIM_DELEG_CUR_FH = 5,
/// OPEN_ARGS_OPEN_CLAIM_DELEG_PREV_FH = 6
/// };
///
///
/// enum open_args_createmode4 {
/// OPEN_ARGS_CREATEMODE_UNCHECKED4 = 0,
/// OPEN_ARGS_CREATE_MODE_GUARDED = 1,
/// OPEN_ARGS_CREATEMODE_EXCLUSIVE4 = 2,
/// OPEN_ARGS_CREATE_MODE_EXCLUSIVE4_1 = 3
/// };
///
Haynes & Myklebust Expires 5 April 2025 [Page 6]
Internet-Draft Deleg Stateid October 2024
///
/// typedef open_arguments4 fattr4_open_arguments;
///
///
/// %/*
/// % * Determine what OPEN supports.
/// % */
/// const FATTR4_OPEN_ARGUMENTS = 86;
///
///
/// const OPEN4_SHARE_ACCESS_WANT_OPEN_XOR_DELEGATION = 0x200000;
///
///
/// const OPEN4_RESULT_NO_OPEN_STATEID = 0x00000010;
///
<CODE ENDS>
4. OPEN grants only one of Open or Delegation Stateid
The OPEN (See Section 18.16 of [RFC8881]) procedure returns an open
stateid to the client to reference the state of the file. The client
could also request a delegation stateid in the OPEN arguments. The
file can be considered open for the client as long as the count of
open and delegated stateids is greater than 0. Either type of
stateid is sufficient to enable the server to treat the file as if it
were open, which allows READ (See Section 18.25 of [RFC8881]), WRITE
(See Section 18.38 of [RFC8881]), LOCK (See Section 18.12 of
[RFC8881]), and LAYOUTGET (see Section 18.50 of [RFC8881]) operations
to proceed. If the client gets both an open and a delegation stateid
as part of the OPEN, then it has to return them both to the server.
A further consideration is that during each operation, the client can
send a costly GETATTR (See Section 18.7 of [RFC8881]).
If the client knows that the server supports the
OPEN4_SHARE_ACCESS_WANT_OPEN_XOR_DELEGATION flag (as determined by an
earlier GETATTR operation which queried for the fattr4_open_arguments
attribute), then the client can supply that flag during the OPEN and
only get either an open or delegation stateid.
The client is already prepared to not get a delegation stateid even
if requested. In order to not send an open stateid, the server MUST
indicate that fact with the result flag of
OPEN4_RESULT_NO_OPEN_STATEID. The open stateid field,
OPEN4resok.stateid (see Section 18.16.2 of [RFC8881]), MUST be set to
the special all zero stateid in this case.
Haynes & Myklebust Expires 5 April 2025 [Page 7]
Internet-Draft Deleg Stateid October 2024
Note that the OPEN4_SHARE_ACCESS_WANT_OPEN_XOR_DELEGATION flag is a
hint. The server might return both stateids. Consider the scenario
in which the client opens a file read-only (with
OPEN4_SHARE_ACCESS_WANT_OPEN_XOR_DELEGATION set) and gets only an
open stateid. If the client then opens the file for read-write (with
OPEN4_SHARE_ACCESS_WANT_OPEN_XOR_DELEGATION set), then the server has
three options:
1. Only an open stateid with the correct seqid.
2. Only a delegation stateid with the open stateid now having an
incorrect seqid as it needs to be upgraded.
3. Both an open (which will be upgraded) and a delegation stateid.
In this scenario, returning just a delegation stateid would hide
information from the client. If the client already has an open
stateid, then the server SHOULD ignore the
OPEN4_SHARE_ACCESS_WANT_OPEN_XOR_DELEGATION flag and return both the
open and delegation stateids.
4.1. Implementation Experience
The CLOSE operation (see Section 18.2 of [RFC8881]) neither
explicitly nor implicitly releases any delegation stateids. This is
not symmetrical with the OPEN operation, which can grant both an open
and a delegation stateid. This specification could have tried to
extend the CLOSE operation to release both stateids, but
implementation experience shows that is more costly than the approach
which has been proposed.
Consider a small workload of creating a file with content. That
takes 3 synchronous and 1 asynchronous operations with existing
implementations. The first synchronous one has to OPEN the file, the
second synchronous one performs the WRITE to the file, the third
synchronous one has to CLOSE the file, and the fourth asynchronous
one uses DELEGRETURN (see Section 18.6 of [RFC8881]) to return the
delegation stateid.
<CODE BEGINS>
SEQ PUTFH OPEN GETFH GETATTR
SEQ PUTFH WRITE GETATTR
SEQ PUTFH CLOSE
...
SEQ PUTFH DELEGRETURN
<CODE ENDS>
Haynes & Myklebust Expires 5 April 2025 [Page 8]
Internet-Draft Deleg Stateid October 2024
With the proposed approach of setting the
OPEN_ARGS_SHARE_ACCESS_WANT_OPEN_XOR_DELEGATION flag during the OPEN,
the number of operations is always 3. The first two compounds are
still synchronous, but the last is asynchronous. I.e., since the
client no longer has to send a CLOSE operation, it can delay the
DELEGRETURN until either the server requests it back via delegation
recall or garbage collection causes the client to return the stateid.
<CODE BEGINS>
SEQ PUTFH OPEN(OPEN_ARGS_SHARE_ACCESS_WANT_OPEN_XOR_DELEGATION)
GETFH GETATTR
SEQ PUTFH WRITE GETATTR
...
SEQ PUTFH DELEGRETURN
<CODE ENDS>
This approach reduces the cost of synchronous operations by 33% and
the total number of operations by 25%. Contrast that against the
alternative proposal of having CLOSE return both stateids, which
would not reduce the number of synchronous operations.
5. Proxying of Times
When a client is granted a write delegation on a file, it becomes the
authority for the file contents and associated attributes. If the
server queries the client as to the state of the file via a
CB_GETATTR (see Section 20.1 of [RFC8881]), then, according to the
unextended NFSv4 protocol, it can only determine the size of the file
and the change attribute. In the case of the client holding the
delegation, it has the current values of the access and modify times.
There is no way that other clients can have access to these values.
While the client could send a compound of the form: SEQ, PUTFH,
SETATTR (time_modify | time_access), DELEGRETURN, to notify the
server of the proxied values, that SETATTR (see Section 18.30 of
[RFC8881]) operation would cause either or both of change (see
Section 5.8.1.4 of [RFC8881]) or time_metadata (see Section 5.8.2.42
of [RFC8881]) to be modified to the current time on the server.
There is no current provision to obtain these values before
delegation return using CB_GETATTR. As a result, it can not pass
these times up to an application expecting POSIX compliance, as is
often necessary for correct operation.
Haynes & Myklebust Expires 5 April 2025 [Page 9]
Internet-Draft Deleg Stateid October 2024
With the addition of the new flag:
OPEN4_SHARE_ACCESS_WANT_DELEG_TIMESTAMPS, the client and server can
negotiate that the client will be the authority for these values and
upon return of the delegation stateid via a DELEGRETURN (see section
18.6 of [RFC8881]), the times will be passed back to the server. If
the server is queried by another client for either the size or the
times, it will need to use a CB_GETATTR to query the client which
holds the delegation (see Section 20.1 of [RFC8881]).
If a server informs the client via the fattr4_open_arguments
attribute that it supports
OPEN_ARGS_SHARE_ACCESS_WANT_DELEG_TIMESTAMPS and it returns a valid
delegation stateid for an OPEN operation which sets the
OPEN4_SHARE_ACCESS_WANT_DELEG_TIMESTAMPS flag, then it MUST query the
client via a CB_GETATTR for the fattr4_time_deleg_access (see
Section 5.2) attribute and fattr4_time_deleg_modify attribute (see
Section 5.2). (The change time can be derived from the modify time.)
Further, when it gets a SETATTR with those attributes being set, then
it MUST accept those fattr4_time_deleg_access attribute and
fattr4_time_deleg_modify attribute changes and derive the change time
or reject the changes with NFS4ERR_DELAY (see Section 15.1.1.3 of
[RFC8881]).
These new attributes are invalid to be used with GETATTR, VERIFY, and
NVERIFY and can only be used with CB_GETATTR and SETATTR by a client
holding an appropriate delegation. The SETATTR SHOULD either be in a
separate compound before the one containing the DELEGRETURN or when
in the same compound, as an operation before the DELEGRETURN.
Failure to properly sequence the operations may lead to race
conditions.
A key prerequisite of this approach is that the server and client are
in time synchronization with each other. Note that while the base
NFSv4.2 does not require such synchronization, the use of RPCSEC_GSS
typically makes such a requirement. When the client presents either
fattr4_time_deleg_access or fattr4_time_deleg_modify attributes to
the server, the server MUST decide for both of them whether the time
presented is before the corresponding time_access (see
Section 5.8.2.37 of [RFC8881]) or time_modify (see Section 5.8.2.43
of [RFC8881]) attribute on the file or past the current server time.
When the time presented is before the original time, then the update
is ignored. When the time presented is in the future, the server can
either clamp the new time to the current time, or it may return
NFS4ERR_DELAY to the client, allowing it to retry. Note that if the
clock skew is large, the delay approach would result in access to the
file being denied until the clock skew is exceeded.
Haynes & Myklebust Expires 5 April 2025 [Page 10]
Internet-Draft Deleg Stateid October 2024
A change in the access time MUST NOT advance the change time, also
known as the time_metadata attribute (see Section 5.8.2.42 of
[RFC8881]), but a change in the modify time might advance the change
time (and in turn the change attribute (See Section 5.8.1.4 of
[RFC8881]). If the modify time is greater than the change time and
before the current time, then the change time is adjusted to the
modify time and not the current time (as is most likely done on most
SETATTR calls that change the metadata). If the modify time is in
the future, it will be clamped to the current time.
Note that each of the possible times, access, modify, and change, are
compared to the current time. They should all be compared against
the same time value for the current time. I.e., do not retrieve a
different value of the current time for each calculation.
If the client sets the OPEN4_SHARE_ACCESS_WANT_DELEG_TIMESTAMPS flag
in an OPEN operation, then it MUST support the
fattr4_time_deleg_access and fattr4_time_deleg_modify attributes both
in the CB_GETATTR and SETATTR operations.
5.1. Use case: NFSv3 client proxy
Consider a NFSv3 client which wants to access data on a server which
only supports NFSv4.2. An implementation may introduce an NFSv3
server that functions as an NFSv4.2 client, serving as a gateway
between the two otherwise incompatible systems. As NFSv3 is a
stateless protocol, the state is not kept on the client, but rather
the NFSv3 server. As the NFSv3 server is already managing the state,
it can proxy file delegations to avoid spurious GETATTRs. I.e., as
the client queries the NFSv3 server for the attributes, they can be
served without the NFSv3 server sending a GETATTR to the NFSv4.2
server.
5.2. XDR for Proxying of Times
Haynes & Myklebust Expires 5 April 2025 [Page 11]
Internet-Draft Deleg Stateid October 2024
<CODE BEGINS>
///
/// /*
/// * attributes for the delegation times being
/// * cached and served by the "client"
/// */
/// typedef nfstime4 fattr4_time_deleg_access;
/// typedef nfstime4 fattr4_time_deleg_modify;
///
///
/// %/*
/// % * New RECOMMENDED Attribute for
/// % * delegation caching of times
/// % */
/// const FATTR4_TIME_DELEG_ACCESS = 84;
/// const FATTR4_TIME_DELEG_MODIFY = 85;
///
///
/// const OPEN4_SHARE_ACCESS_WANT_DELEG_TIMESTAMPS = 0x100000;
///
<CODE ENDS>
6. Extraction of XDR
This document contains the external data representation (XDR)
[RFC4506] description of the new open flags for delegating the file
to the client. The XDR description is embedded in this document in a
way that makes it simple for the reader to extract into a ready-to-
compile form. The reader can feed this document into the following
shell script to produce the machine readable XDR description of the
new flags:
<CODE BEGINS>
#!/bin/sh
grep '^ *///' $* | sed 's?^ */// ??' | sed 's?^ *///$??'
<CODE ENDS>
That is, if the above script is stored in a file called "extract.sh",
and this document is in a file called "spec.txt", then the reader can
do:
<CODE BEGINS>
sh extract.sh < spec.txt > delstid_prot.x
<CODE ENDS>
The effect of the script is to remove leading white space from each
line, plus a sentinel sequence of "///". XDR descriptions with the
sentinel sequence are embedded throughout the document.
Haynes & Myklebust Expires 5 April 2025 [Page 12]
Internet-Draft Deleg Stateid October 2024
Note that the XDR code contained in this document depends on types
from the NFSv4.2 nfs4_prot.x file (generated from [RFC7863]). This
includes both nfs types that end with a 4, such as offset4, length4,
etc., as well as more generic types such as uint32_t and uint64_t.
While the XDR can be appended to that from [RFC7863], the various
code snippets belong in their respective areas of that XDR.
7. Security Considerations
While we are extending some capabilities for client delegation, there
are no new security concerns. The client cannot be queried by other
clients as to the cached attributes. The client could report false
data for the cached attributes, but it already has this ability via a
SETATTR operation (see Section 18.30 of [RFC8881]).
8. IANA Considerations
There are no IANA considerations.
9. References
9.1. Normative References
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119,
DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>.
[RFC4506] Eisler, M., Ed., "XDR: External Data Representation
Standard", STD 67, RFC 4506, DOI 10.17487/RFC4506, May
2006, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4506>.
[RFC7862] Haynes, T., "Network File System (NFS) Version 4 Minor
Version 2 Protocol", RFC 7862, DOI 10.17487/RFC7862,
November 2016, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7862>.
[RFC7863] Haynes, T., "Network File System (NFS) Version 4 Minor
Version 2 External Data Representation Standard (XDR)
Description", RFC 7863, DOI 10.17487/RFC7863, November
2016, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7863>.
[RFC8174] Leiba, B., "Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in RFC
2119 Key Words", BCP 14, RFC 8174, DOI 10.17487/RFC8174,
May 2017, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8174>.
Haynes & Myklebust Expires 5 April 2025 [Page 13]
Internet-Draft Deleg Stateid October 2024
[RFC8178] Noveck, D., "Rules for NFSv4 Extensions and Minor
Versions", RFC 8178, DOI 10.17487/RFC8178, July 2017,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8178>.
[RFC8881] Noveck, D., Ed. and C. Lever, "Network File System (NFS)
Version 4 Minor Version 1 Protocol", RFC 8881,
DOI 10.17487/RFC8881, August 2020,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8881>.
Appendix A. Acknowledgments
Trond Myklebust, Tom Haynes, and David Flynn all worked on the
prototype at Hammerspace.
Dave Noveck, Chuck Lever, Rick Macklem, and Zaheduzzaman Sarker
provided reviews of the document.
Jeff Layton provided experience from an implementation he authored.
Authors' Addresses
Thomas Haynes
Hammerspace
Email: loghyr@hammerspace.com
Trond Myklebust
Hammerspace
Email: trondmy@hammerspace.com
Haynes & Myklebust Expires 5 April 2025 [Page 14]