Subject: Definitions of utf8str_* in draft-ietf-nfsv4-rfc3010bis-05

From: "Sergey Klyushin" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 7 Feb 2003 16:44:41 -0500

Hello

Finally I've decided to update my nfs4_prot.h file from version 1.119 to
version 1.120 of nfs4_prot.x (http://www.nfsv4.org/nfs4_prot.x)
and http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-nfsv4-rfc3010bis-05.txt

I was really surprised with definition of utf8str_cis, utf8str_cs and
utf8str_mixed.

draft-ietf-nfsv4-rfc3010bis-05.txt: Paragraph 2.1.  Basic Data Types

   utf8string      typedef opaque          utf8string<>;
                   UTF-8 encoding for strings

   utf8str_cis     typedef opaque          utf8str_cis<>;
                   Case-insensitive UTF-8 string

   utf8str_cs      typedef opaque          utf8str_cs<>;
                   Case-sensitive UTF-8 string

   utf8str_mixed   typedef opaque          utf8str_mixed<>;
                   UTF-8 strings with a case sensitive prefix and
                   a case insensitive suffix.

But later in Paragraph 18.  RPC definition file 
and in http://www.nfsv4.org/nfs4_prot.x:

   typedef opaque          utf8string<>;
   typedef utf8string      utf8str_cis<>;
   typedef utf8string      utf8str_cs<>;
   typedef utf8string      utf8str_mixed<>;

I believe that definitions in Paragraph 18 and in
http://www.nfsv4.org/nfs4_prot.x are wrong and MUST be
   typedef opaque      utf8string<>;
   typedef opaque      utf8str_cis<>;
   typedef opaque      utf8str_cs<>;
   typedef opaque      utf8str_mixed<>;
(or I really missed something)

I hope it's not "too late" to change draft-ietf-nfsv4-rfc3010bis-05.txt.

Thanks,
Sergey

---

From: Mike Eisler <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 07 Feb 2003 14:06:47 -0800

Sergey,

Yes the .x file is wrong.

Dave Noveck noticed this a week or so ago, and beepy gave IESG a heads up.
Either we will spin another i-d, or fix it when the RFC editor gives the 
authors the
final draft to review. Thx.

    -mre

---

From: Spencer Shepler <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 7 Feb 2003 16:02:16 -0600

Sergey,
  Thanks for pointing this out.  Someone else recently raised this
issue as well in private mail and I have actually made updates such
that the I-D will be updated during the final comments period provided
by the RFC editor.
  For those that are interested, I have attached the updated
nfs4_prot.x.  Sorry about the spam but I want to make sure everyone
has a copy.

Spencer

-- 
Spencer