Subject: [nfsv4] RFC3530bis: NFS4ERR_OLDSTATEID, NFS4ERR_BADSEQ, and RENEW

From: Marcel Telka <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2011 09:03:45 +0100

Hi,

While reading the RFC3530bis document at
http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-ietf-nfsv4-rfc3530bis-16.txt I found few issues
there:

Issue #1
--------

   o  When any of the state-owner sequence values are invalid,
      NFS4ERR_BADSEQ is returned.  When a stateid sequence is checked,
      NFS4ERR_BAD_STATEID, or NFS4ERR_OLDSTATEID is returned as

There should be NFS4ERR_OLD_STATEID instead of NFS4ERR_OLDSTATEID.

Issue #2
--------

There are few places where the NFS4ERR_BADSEQ is used in the bis document. For
example see Issue #1 above. In general, all occurences are in 9.1.8. and in
15.12.5. Such error is not listed in section 13.1. There is only
NFS4ERR_BAD_SEQID there. Is NFS4ERR_BADSEQ a typo? Should NFS4ERR_BAD_SEQID be
used instead?

Issue #3
--------

   o  Any operation made with a valid stateid (CLOSE, DELEGPURGE,
      DELEGRETURN, LOCK, LOCKU, OPEN, OPEN_CONFIRM, OPEN_DOWNGRADE,
      READ, RENEW, SETATTR, or WRITE).  This does not include the
      special stateids of all bits 0 or all bits 1.

The RENEW operation does not use stateid. The clientid is used instead:

15.30.  Operation 30: RENEW - Renew a Lease

15.30.1.  SYNOPSIS

     clientid -> ()

Thanks for fixing the RFC3530bis.

-- 
Marcel Telka
RPE, Systems

---

From: Rick Macklem <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2011 10:57:03 -0500 (EST)

> The RENEW operation does not use stateid. The clientid is used
DELEGPURGE and OPEN also use a clientid (although OPEN with
claim_delegate_cur has a stateid as well as a clientid).

I haven't looked at the document, but maybe it just needs to
say "clientid/stateid" instead of "stateid"?

> _______________________________________________
> nfsv4 mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nfsv4

---

From: Marcel Telka <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2011 17:08:08 +0100

> say "clientid/stateid" instead of "stateid"?

That would be enough, I think.

-- 
Marcel Telka
RPE, Systems

---

From: "J. Bruce Fields" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2011 12:49:46 -0500

> NFS4ERR_BAD_SEQID there. Is NFS4ERR_BADSEQ a typo? Should NFS4ERR_BAD_SEQID be

Yes, note I've got a patch for both of those here:

	git://linux-nfs.org/~bfields/3530bis.git

Or see
	http://git.linux-nfs.org/?p=bfields/3530bis.git;a=commitdiff;h=627373738847ed1bdab205718e5c0f3e59a1c678

--b.

---

From: "Haynes, Tom" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2011 18:28:52 +0000

Okay, I've updated the master at github.

---

From: "J. Bruce Fields" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2011 13:34:00 -0500

> Okay, I've updated the master at github.

Thanks!

That just leaves Issue #3.

--b.

---

From: Marcel Telka <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2011 10:28:03 +0100

Thanks!

-- 
Marcel Telka
RPE, Systems