The expectation is that RPC refresh will affect XCB exactly as it affects other eligible protocol elements. The use of afs_uint64 values for timestamps in XCB, for example, will be defined to be conformant with the time representation specified for RPC refresh.
----- "Jeffrey Hutzelman" <[email protected]> wrote: > --On Thursday, October 08, 2009 12:51:53 PM -0400 "Matt W. Benjamin" > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > 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. > > It's not a blocker for "we think this is a good idea". > However, to publish a specification, we must reach rough consensus on > that > specification, including all of the details. We can't leave things to > be > "filled in later"; once we approve a document, there is no later. > > -- Jeff > > _______________________________________________ > 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
