[...] > ???I'd be happy to see a whitepaper or some kind of transition document > with the case, describing (ideally in terms a customer should be able > to > understand) how to transition from cachefs to some other strategy > (iSCSI, NFSv4, whatever). I don't know how to make the same > functionality (NFS like) work with iSCSI, but I'll chalk that up to > my > own ignorance rather than any deficiency in iSCSI. > > It would be nice to see a commitment to closing any remaining gap as > much as possible, perhaps by further development of NFSv4 -- as > others > have suggested. > > As a final note, I do recall that cachefs was supposed to be generic > for > things like cdroms, etc. I do agree with the proposal that cachefs > like > behavior for anything *other than NFS* is probably not terribly > interesting.
Don't forget the "smbfs" client (similar to the NFSv4 client). That suggests the need for a solution above the VFS, or at least one that can can be mostly common among VFS implementations. Gordon
