Wouter,
On 12 Apr 2016, at 14:01, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> It's not being applied because of this ;-)
OK, I've sent a PATCHv9 with my suggested wording (so at least
it doesn't make anything worse), but I really think we should
avoid addressing further nits in the disconnection regime within
a c
On Tue, Apr 12, 2016 at 01:57:25PM +0100, Alex Bligh wrote:
>
> On 12 Apr 2016, at 13:40, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
>
> > Right, that sounds good.
>
> Great. I may look at that when the other doc patches are applied.
>
> On which note, back to $subject, how is PATCHv8?
It's not being applied bec
On 12 Apr 2016, at 13:40, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> Right, that sounds good.
Great. I may look at that when the other doc patches are applied.
On which note, back to $subject, how is PATCHv8?
--
Alex Bligh
--
Fin
On Tue, Apr 12, 2016 at 10:53:57AM +0100, Alex Bligh wrote:
> Wouter,
>
> On 12 Apr 2016, at 10:20, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
>
> > To summarize, there are three ways for the connection to end:
> >
> > - The client wishes to end the session, and sends the appropriate
> > termination message (OPT_
Wouter,
On 12 Apr 2016, at 10:20, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> To summarize, there are three ways for the connection to end:
>
> - The client wishes to end the session, and sends the appropriate
> termination message (OPT_ABORT or CMD_DISC). This is a normal
> disconnect.
> - Either peer violates
On Tue, Apr 12, 2016 at 08:47:49AM +0100, Alex Bligh wrote:
>
> On 12 Apr 2016, at 07:01, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
>
> > hat doesn't mean OPT_ABORT not having a reply is necessarily a good
> > idea. Since it's only used by reference nbd-client in just one use case
> > at this point, I don't think
On 12 Apr 2016, at 07:01, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> hat doesn't mean OPT_ABORT not having a reply is necessarily a good
> idea. Since it's only used by reference nbd-client in just one use case
> at this point, I don't think it's particularly bad to change the
> definition to say that the server
On Mon, Apr 11, 2016 at 09:34:44PM +0100, Alex Bligh wrote:
> Eric,
>
> On 11 Apr 2016, at 21:14, Eric Blake wrote:
> > Current qemu NBD server implementation does NOT send a reply to
> > NBD_OPT_ABORT, but immediately closes the connection. I don't know if
> > that is a bug in qemu (especially g
Eric,
On 11 Apr 2016, at 21:14, Eric Blake wrote:
> Current qemu NBD server implementation does NOT send a reply to
> NBD_OPT_ABORT, but immediately closes the connection. I don't know if
> that is a bug in qemu (especially given the discussion on NBD_CMD_DISC),
> but it is an independent issue f
On 04/11/2016 01:27 AM, Alex Bligh wrote:
>>> +There is no requirement for the client or server to complete a negotiation
>>> +if it does not wish to do so. If the client does not find an export it
>>> +is looking for (for instance) it may simply close the TCP connection.
>>> +Under certain circum
Wouter,
On 11 Apr 2016, at 07:10, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> Mostly there. Final note:
>
> On Sun, Apr 10, 2016 at 01:47:32PM +0100, Alex Bligh wrote:
>> diff --git a/doc/proto.md b/doc/proto.md
>> index f117394..5005552 100644
>> --- a/doc/proto.md
>> +++ b/doc/proto.md
>> @@ -195,6 +195,13 @@ r
Mostly there. Final note:
On Sun, Apr 10, 2016 at 01:47:32PM +0100, Alex Bligh wrote:
> diff --git a/doc/proto.md b/doc/proto.md
> index f117394..5005552 100644
> --- a/doc/proto.md
> +++ b/doc/proto.md
> @@ -195,6 +195,13 @@ request before sending the next one of the same type.
> The server MAY
* Call out TLS into a separate section
* Add details of the TLS protocol itself
* Emphasise that actual TLS session initiation (i.e. the TLS handshake) can
be initiated from either side (as required by the TLS standard I believe
and as actually works in practice)
* Clarify what is a requirem
13 matches
Mail list logo
