Obaid, Thanks. I will note that the paragraph in question is also present in the [SMB2-Preview] document that includes SMB2.2.
Looking forward to your response! Chris -)----- Obaid Farooqi wrote: > Hi Chris: > I'll help you with this issue and will get back to you as soon as I have an > answer. > > Regards, > Obaid Farooqi > Escalation Engineer | Microsoft > > Exceeding your expectations is my highest priority. If you would like to > provide feedback on your case you may contact my manager at nkang at > Microsoft dot com > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Christopher R. Hertel [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Tuesday, December 06, 2011 11:12 PM > To: Interoperability Documentation Help; [email protected] > Subject: SMB2 ProcessId header field for SYNC messages. > > Dochelp, > > Hi. > > The SYNC version of the SMB2 message header has a ProcessId field, which is > described in [MS-SMB2] v20110920, section 2.2.1.2, pg30, as > follows: > > > ProcessId (4 bytes): The client-side identification of the process that > issued the request. The client MUST set this field to 0xFEFF. The server > MUST set this field to the ProcessId value received in the corresponding > request, if any, or to 0 otherwise. The client MUST ignore this field on > receipt. > > > That description, of course, makes no sense to me at all. Sorry. > > * The field is 4 bytes, but 0xFEFF is two bytes. Does the doc mean > 0x0000FEFF or 0xFEFF0000 or something else? > > * If the client "MUST" set the field to 0xFEFF, then the value is > meaningless since it is always the same. If it is always the same > value, then it cannot identify the process that issued the request. > > * If the server "MUST" set this field to the value in the corresponding > request, then surely the client "MUST" be able to set the field to > something other than 0xFEFF. > > * When compsing the response, how could there not be a value in the > corresponding request? The only way I can imagine is that the request > was sent as an ASYNC request (no ProcessId field) and the server is > sending a SYNC response. Is that even possible? > > * The description states that the client must ignore the field. > Shouldn't the client use the value in the field to ensure that > the result is sent to the correct client process? > > Am I missing something in this description? Hit me with the clue-bat. > > Thanks. > > Chris -)----- > > Microsoft is committed to protecting your privacy. Please read the Microsoft > Privacy Statement for more information.The above is an email for a support > case from Microsoft Corp.REPLY ALL TO THIS MESSAGE or INCLUDE > [email protected] IN YOUR REPLY if you want your response added to the > case automatically. For technical assistance, please include the Support > Engineer on the TO: line. Thank you. > > _______________________________________________ > cifs-protocol mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/cifs-protocol -- "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
