Subject: [nfsv4] Lease Renewal (Section 8.5)

From: [email-masked]
Date: Thu, 7 Aug 2003 11:39:02 -0400 (EDT)

Oh no, not me again...

I was just wondering if there was a reason that LOCKT and RELEASELOCKOWNER
with a valid clientid were omitted from the list that renews a lease.
(I've just changed the code so these cases don't do a lease renewal,
 but it is trivial to change back, if a lease renewal makes sense?)

Thanks again, rick

_______________________________________________
nfsv4 mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nfsv4

---

From: Spencer Shepler <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 7 Aug 2003 12:50:07 -0500

>  but it is trivial to change back, if a lease renewal makes sense?)

I don't remember any good reasons.  The lame one for LOCKT might have
been that it wasn't part of the mainline state handling; what I mean
by this is that even though a lockowner is used the state is not
changed.  Lame reason.

The omission of RELEASE_LOCKOWNER is probably just that - an omission.

The server can certainly update the lease for these operations even
thought the client may not think they do.  The result will be that the
client may do a RENEW more often than needed.  Not that bad.

Spencer