Yes, there are RPC refresh dependencies. I don't believe any is a blocker for consensus, however, as evidenced by the request from the hackathon to proceed.
Matt ----- "Andrew Deason" <[email protected]> wrote: > On Wed, 7 Oct 2009 15:43:50 -0400 (EDT) > "Matt W. Benjamin" <[email protected]> wrote: > > > The text under discussion (as elsewhere posted) is here: > > > > http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-benjamin-extendedcallbackinfo-00.txt > > > > If you are interested in the progress of AFS or the draft, your > > comments/feedback (positive or negative) are greatly appreciated. > > I noticed in the Edinburgh hackathon logs (the transcribed jabber > logs), > it was mentioned/suggested that time values in all RPCs should be > moved > to 64 bits, and should have 100ns granularity. The XCB draft has 64 > bit > time, but I don't think I see anything specifying granularity like > that. > > We need to specify that, don't we? Unless it's covered by something > else > I'm not aware of. > > -- > Andrew Deason > [email protected] > > > _______________________________________________ > AFS3-standardization mailing list > [email protected] > http://michigan-openafs-lists.central.org/mailman/listinfo/afs3-standardization -- Matt Benjamin The Linux Box 206 South Fifth Ave. Suite 150 Ann Arbor, MI 48104 http://linuxbox.com tel. 734-761-4689 fax. 734-769-8938 cel. 734-216-5309 _______________________________________________ AFS3-standardization mailing list [email protected] http://michigan-openafs-lists.central.org/mailman/listinfo/afs3-standardization
