> On Dec 17, 2015, at 12:09 PM, Elwyn Davies <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi, Tom. > > Excellent... so I think we are done with dot-x. > > One additional point that I was going to write into the main minorversion2 > review relating to referencing the requirements RFC 7204. rpcsec-gssv3 also > references the requirements RFC but the amount of info that is needful to > support implementers seems to be mostly in minorversion2. Would it be > possible for you and Andy to work out if anything extra is really needed in > minorversio2 (about guest mode primarily I think) so that the requirements > reference is not needed and rpcsec-gssv3 can just reference minorversion2 for > all info on the modes? I wasn't sure what, if anything, extra was needed in > minorversion2. >
Ack, will look into that - I’m just starting on the main document review now. :-) > Cheers, > Elwyn > > On 17/12/2015 02:19, Tom Haynes wrote: >>> On Dec 13, 2015, at 4:44 PM, Elwyn Davies <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Area >>> Review Team (Gen-ART) reviews all IETF documents being processed >>> by the IESG for the IETF Chair. Please treat these comments just >>> like any other last call comments. >>> >>> For more information, please see the FAQ at >>> >>> <http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/area/gen/trac/wiki/GenArtfaq>. >>> >>> Document: draft-ietf-nfsv4-minorversion2-dot-x-39.txt >>> Reviewer: Elwyn Davies >>> Review Date: 2015-12-13 >>> IETF LC End Date: 2015-12-09 >>> IESG Telechat date: (if known) - >>> >>> Summary: Ready with nits. The XDR specification appears to be a superset >>> of the v4.1 XDR specification and combines a correction of the five >>> remaining discrepancies between v4.1 and v4.0bis ( definition and use of >>> the NFS4_OTHER_SIZE constant, addition and use of the ascii_REQUIRED4 type, >>> modification of the typedef of linktext4). The additions of the 4.2 >>> interface appears to match the specification in >>> draft-ietf-nfsv4-minorversion2-39 except for two attribute typedef items >>> mentioned below. One discrepancy would have no operational effect as the >>> type used in the other draft is an alias for the type used here but the >>> clone_blksize error changes the size of the type. >>> >>> I have checked that the extracted code is accepted by rpcgen and generates >>> files as expected. >>> >>> Major issues: >>> None >>> >>> Minor issues: >>> None >> >> >> Hi Elwyn, >> >> Thanks for the review - sorry for the delay in responding, I’m just now >> surfacing from my job. :-) >> >> Responses inline. >> >>> Nits/editorial comments: >>> Observation: It might be useful to note that this XDR specification is >>> fully upwards compatible with the v4.0bis with the minor exception of the >>> clientaddr4 structure which has been replaced by (strictly, aliased to) >>> netaddr4 which has the same members with the same purposes but the names >>> have changed (r_netid -> na_r_netid, r_addr ->na_r_addr). This effectively >>> fully reconverges the v4.0bis and v4.1 strands of the XDR. >>> >> Shamelessly stolen almost verbatim! >> >>> Line 1145: In draft-ietf-nfsv4-minorversion2-39 we have typedef length4 >>> fattr4_space_freed >>> whereas in this draft we have >>> typedef uint64_t fattr4_space_freed >> Fixed this in the XDR document. >> >>> Line 1149: In draft-ietf-nfsv4-minorversion2-39 we have typedef length4 >>> fattr4_clone_blksize >>> whereas in this draft we have >>> typedef uint32_t fattr4_clone_blksize >> >> And for this one, I made the change to uint32_t in >> draft-ietf-nfsv4-minorversion2-39 . >> >> Thanks again! >> Tom >> > _______________________________________________ Gen-art mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art
