Bill, I completely DISAGREE with these changes.
I'll address this through other channels. Chris -)----- Bill Wesse wrote: > Good morning Chris. I am advised we have some changes planned for [MS-CIFS] > concerning error codes. I have attached a pdf showing the tentative changed > text, which addresses the SMB_FLAGS2_NT_STATUS bit, along with a Windows > Behavior note. > > Please let me know your considerations concerning this. > > Regards, > Bill Wesse > MCSE, MCTS / Senior Escalation Engineer, US-CSS DSC PROTOCOL TEAM > 8055 Microsoft Way > Charlotte, NC 28273 > Email: [email protected] > Tel: +1(980) 776-8200 > Cell: +1(704) 661-5438 > Fax: +1(704) 665-9606 > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Bill Wesse > Sent: Thursday, January 14, 2010 2:45 PM > To: 'Christopher R. Hertel' > Cc: [email protected]; Jeremy Allison; [email protected]; > [email protected]; Gary Shang; José Rivera > Subject: RE: STATUS_OS2_INVALID_LEVEL > > Thanks for the clarification about the SMB_FLAGS2_NT_STATUS bit flipping (I > inadvertently generalized that to your comments concerning 32-bit > wire-identical to DOS&OS/2 style Class/Code pairs). > > As you have already seen (or will no doubt shortly see), the internal > conversation about whose lap the work will land in is expanding. > > Concerning the supplemental content (if that becomes necessary), a KB sounds > reasonable - we do have some KBs that fall into that brain space (for > example, the following, which I think may need an update): > > INFO: Mapping NT Status Error Codes to Win32 Error Codes > http://support.microsoft.com/kb/113996 > > On that same topic, I am sure there are better formats that could made > available on a possible Blog entry (http://blogs.msdn.com/OpenSpecification); > zipped attachments there could include .csv (or tab-delimited) files running > this down (and don't we all love those when we have source identifiers / > enum's / data to declare...). Nothing like a good old-fashioned regex party! > > Regards, > Bill Wesse > MCSE, MCTS / Senior Escalation Engineer, US-CSS DSC PROTOCOL TEAM > 8055 Microsoft Way > Charlotte, NC 28273 > Email: [email protected] > Tel: +1(980) 776-8200 > Cell: +1(704) 661-5438 > Fax: +1(704) 665-9606 > > -----Original Message----- > From: Christopher R. Hertel [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Thursday, January 14, 2010 2:16 PM > To: Bill Wesse > Cc: [email protected]; Jeremy Allison; [email protected]; > [email protected]; Gary Shang; José Rivera > Subject: Re: STATUS_OS2_INVALID_LEVEL > > Bill Wesse wrote: >> Thanks for the heads up Christopher - you are totally correct in saying >> my comments on the complexity of NT platform SMB error returns were >> meant to be 'polite understatements' (especially that pesky flipped >> response SMB_FLAGS2_NT_STATUS bit, not to mention the 'occasionally >> optional' WordCount and ByteCount absence from transact2 responses). > > The thing about the flipped bit: The SMB_FLAGS2_NT_STATUS bit is *NOT* > cleared by Windows NT when sending one of the suspect error codes. NT, that > is, is saying that it's a 32-bit code. We've documented these codes as such > in [MS-CIFS]. It makes it MUCH easier to document the entire problem. > > Basically, though, what we're dealing with is a 20-year-old kludge with no > clear fix. It simply needs to be explained so that implementers can work > with it. > >> I will shortly forward your email to concerned internal parties... > > I'm available internally as v-chhert. > Yeah... I'm a double agent! :) > Say hello to Will and Darryl for me. > >> I have no doubt a complete rundown of all the exceptions to the rule >> would be quite valuable to our respective organizations and customers > > It's difficult to get the documentation right but it can be explained and > doing so would probably help you guys out. > >> - figuring what to do in response to a 'surprise' error value classifies >> as yet another 'polite understatement'. > > :) > >> I won't rule out the possibility of (my team) providing supplemental >> content concerning this, in case the documents aren't the optimal place >> for the info - I hate to state the obvious, but a complete WB >> description of the above for all NT/SMB (or just transact2) would be >> pretty big. > > Perhaps a KB article that we can reference from a WB? > >> There I go again. Another understatement. > > :) > > Chris -)----- > > >> -- >> "Implementing CIFS - the Common Internet FileSystem" ISBN: 013047116X >> Samba Team -- http://www.samba.org/ -)----- Christopher R. Hertel >> jCIFS Team -- http://jcifs.samba.org/ -)----- ubiqx development, uninq. >> ubiqx Team -- http://www.ubiqx.org/ -)----- [email protected] >> OnLineBook -- http://ubiqx.org/cifs/ -)----- [email protected] >> >> _______________________________________________ cifs-protocol mailing list [email protected] https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/cifs-protocol
