Subject: V4 at Connectathon -- What protocol *exactly*

From: "Noveck, Dave" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2001 08:42:28 -0800

Obvious answer is the one in RFC3010, but that leaves some open
issues.

One issue has already been discussed.  Everybody is going with 
per-(lockowner+file) stateid's.

Another issue is the updating of seqid on errors.  At the last
bakeoff the rule was "errors don't count".  Neil Brown's position
that that won't work has general acceptance, but what are we going
to do for Connectathon?  Before you answer, remember that one 
(lovely) simplification from the previous approach was that it
limits the amount of information you have to save for retransmission.
In particular, saving the other-locker denial information involves
a lockowner which is an unbounded-length string, so you have to
either copy that and allocate space or reference count the
lockowner structure to prevent it from going away (doing all
the reference-counting correctly much preferred).  We need
to agree on this or we will have interoperability problems.
Are people willing to sign up to have this working in the new
(and correct) way?

One other note:  Using RFC3010 means we will not add the type to
the denial information for Connectathon, despite the fact that 
everybody agrees this is a good thing to do in the spec eventually.

Comments?

---

From: "Noveck, Dave" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2001 13:04:49 -0800

> Are people willing to sign up to have this working in the new

There's been deafening silence here so I'm going to assume
that we're leaving things the way they were for the last bakeoff.

I'll be on vacation next week so if you guys decide in my
absence to change this I'm really going to have to scramble
next week.  I won't hold it against you however, but I think
that each of you will owe me a drink. 

See ya.