Matt W. Benjamin wrote:
Hi Folks,
As subscribers to the afs3-standardization list know already, a
hypothetical last draft of the Extended Callback Information
proposal has been published, including changes requested at the
Edinburgh AFS hackathon which just took place.
The process we've agreed to follow resembles the IETF process,
and as such, to become accepted, the draft needs to achieve
consensus, which we'll know by comments posted to that list,
approving it or raising issues/problems.
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.
Thanks,
Matt
Hello Matt,
I reviewed the draft document again and I have no objections
to the content of the draft.
A minor editorial suggestion would be to clarify the wording
around the cancel event, and explain better how it relates
to the traditional lexicon of "breaking callbacks".
const AFSCB_Event_Cancel = 1; /* extended */
And later, "the AFSCB_Event_Cancel message is similar to a
traditional AFS callback, breaking the call back promise,
and requesting the client not request further status on the FID."
Do you really mean "similar" here?
Excellent work, and thank you for your effort.
Mike --
_______________________________________________
AFS3-standardization mailing list
[email protected]
http://michigan-openafs-lists.central.org/mailman/listinfo/afs3-standardization
