On Thu, Feb 22, 2018 at 06:18:52AM -0800, Frank Filz wrote:
> Ah, that might be an issue. It’s hard to gets POSIX<->NFS V4 ACL
> conversion as best as possible (again, impossible to make it perfect,
> even for POSIX->NFS V4).

Well, POSIX->NFSv4 should be very close to perfect.  (Name mapping might
be the most likely problem in practice.)

> It would be good to fix all these conversion issues (without copying
> code from the kernel – note the license differences…)

The original ACL mapping code was all written while I was at UM/CITI by
me and a couple students, contributed under a permissive BSD-like
license, as you can see from the license header on fs/nfsd/nfs4acl.c.

So you should verify the license and git history to be sure, but I doubt
licensing would be an obstacle.

git://linux-nfs.org/bfields/acl.git also has patches implementing the
same mapping in libacl, written entirely while I was at citi.  They were
never upstreamed.  I'd recommend taking the kernel code instead as it's
gotten more bugfixes.

https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-nfsv4-acl-mapping-05 has the best
documentation of the mapping.

All that aside, I agree with Frank that this is all complicated and
error-prone.  But the richacl patches seem stuck.  The only other
alternative I can think of at this point is to go back to the ietf nfsv4
working group with a proposal to add POSIX-like ACLs to NFSv4.2.


Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
Nfs-ganesha-devel mailing list

Reply via email to