Re: [cifs-protocol] MS-SWN Q9: Section 3.2.4.27-3.2.4.29 seems to actions triggered when the client receives an RESP_ASYNC_NOTIFY - TrackingID#2311070040010334

Hi Jeff, I didn't see a response to my previous request. It's not clear to us what you are looking for here. Having a single netname for multiple nodes sounds similar to a SOFS configuration. We use DNS to enumerate the IP addresses. Windows uses witness for the following: - If

Re: [cifs-protocol] MS-SWN Q9: Section 3.2.4.27-3.2.4.29 seems to actions triggered when the client receives an RESP_ASYNC_NOTIFY - TrackingID#2311070040010334

Hi Stefan, Could you let me know when you think you'll have time to provide more information as requested below? Best regards, Jeff McCashland (He/him) | Senior Escalation Engineer | Microsoft Protocol Open Specifications Team Phone: +1 (425) 703-8300 x38300 | Hours: 9am-5pm | Time zone:

Re: [cifs-protocol] MS-SWN Q9: Section 3.2.4.27-3.2.4.29 seems to actions triggered when the client receives an RESP_ASYNC_NOTIFY - TrackingID#2311070040010334

Hi Stefan, I didn't see a response to my previous request. It's not clear to us what you are looking for here. Having a single netname for multiple nodes sounds similar to a SOFS configuration. We use DNS to enumerate the IP addresses. Windows uses witness for the following: - If

[cifs-protocol] MS-SWN Q9: Section 3.2.4.27-3.2.4.29 seems to actions triggered when the client receives an RESP_ASYNC_NOTIFY - TrackingID#2311070040010334

Hi Stefan, This is in regards to your question: Question 9: Section 3.2.4.27-3.2.4.29 seems to actions triggered when the client receives an RESP_ASYNC_NOTIFY, but there's no specification on how the individual witness registrations handle specific notification events. E.g. based on the