Subject: [nfsv4] Fwd: [[email-masked]: I-D ACTION:draft-mesta-nfsv4-domain-00.txt]

From: Rick Mesta <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2004 17:56:24 -0500

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

---

From: Ted Anderson <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2004 12:35:20 -0400

On 10/21/2004 18:56, Rick Mesta wrote:
> 	Title		: NFSv4 Cross-Domain Considerations
> 	Author(s)	: R. Mesta
> 	Filename	: draft-mesta-nfsv4-domain-00.txt
> 	Pages		: 9
> 	Date		: 2004-10-21
> 	
> The purpose of this document is to elicit discussion on configuration
>    schemes for determining the domain name to be used by NFSv4
>    implementations that do not natively support users and groups from
>    multiple domains.
> 
>    This document also describes a method by which NFSv4 clients and
>    servers can discover a domain name value appropriate for qualifying
>    NFSv4 user and group names, by leveraging DNS TXT resource records.
> 
> A URL for this Internet-Draft is:
> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-mesta-nfsv4-domain-00.txt

The concept of this ID seems reasonable.

I wonder, though, if it wouldn't be better to avoid adding yet another 
undifferentiated usage of DNS TXT resource records and instead expand 
the use of a more application specific RR.  I was thinking you might use 
a new subtype of the AFSDB record.  Subtype 1 and 2 apply to AFS and 
DFS, respectively, so subtype 3 could be NFSv4IDMAP.  Since AFSDB 
records already apply to the application domain shared by NFSv4, namely, 
distributed file systems, this would seem logical.  Further, the domain 
of AFS and DFS users is usually (though not necessarily) defined by the 
name of the AFSDB record, so the usage is even similar.

The analogy is not exact, however, since the AFSDB record identify 
servers given a domain, while the intent of the NFSv4IPMAP reords is to 
identify domains give a (client or server?) host.  Still, it seems 
better to aggregate DNS records for distributed file systems rather than 
dump them into the vast pool of TXT record uses.

Ted Anderson