On 3/10/2011 11:22 AM, Andrew Deason wrote: > On Thu, 10 Mar 2011 11:08:07 -0500 > Jeffrey Altman <[email protected]> wrote: > >> XDR is an IETF standards track RFC (4506) and STD (67). Modifications >> to XDR must be submitted to the IETF for standardization. The process >> for defining new types is specified in RFC 4506. It requires a >> standards track RFC that replaces 4506. >> >> Any work to update 4506 should be performed in conjunction with the >> NFSv4 working group. > > The intention of the new union type I believe was to modify a fork of > XDR, not modify XDR itself. It can be argued whether or not we want to > do that (but I've heard at least once before that we've already done > that with afsUUID, so we're already working with an XDR fork), but > that's the reason why it was being handled just in here.
afsUUID is not a fork of XDR. It is a definition of an XDR construct that is assumed to be present as a building block for all AFS3 protocol definitions. Its scope is to the AFS3 protocol which does not include RX. The RX protocol is independent of AFS3 and so its security classes must be implemented independently of AFS3 XDR extensions. RX could define its own rxUnion that parallels the afsUnion. However, as soon as we have done that we have demonstrated that there is a need for the type that extends beyond just AFS3 and it should be standardized. Jeffrey Altman
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
