Tom Keiser wrote: > We desperately need > a protocol draft so that we can take this discussion over to > afs3-standardization, and hopefully make forward progress.
I cannot echo Tom's sentiment enough. The RXOSD implementation as it is today is an implementation. Even assuming that it implemented a protocol that required no additional changes, we would still need a protocol document that can be used to permit kAFS, the OpenAFS Windows cache manager, Arla, etc. to implement the functionality. More importantly, it is impossible for anyone to rationally evaluate the impact of accepting the RXOSD implementation into the OpenAFS client and server without being able to visualize the protocol that is implemented and under the semantics. I suspect that are good portion of the time that Tom has spent on his white paper has been to extract from some version of the source code the protocol. It should not be necessary for an implementation reviewer to perform this work. Please spend the time to write a protocol specification for OSD that can be analyzed. Jeffrey Altman _______________________________________________ OpenAFS-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openafs.org/mailman/listinfo/openafs-devel
