Subject: RE: [nfsv4] mode bits

From: "Noveck, Dave" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 11 Nov 2005 11:07:44 -0500

Right.  It is just that the text as written isn't as clear 
as it might be on this point.  Given that there are two
paragraphs of explanation of the low-order nine bits with
the three bits in question not mentioned at all in these
paragraphs, the phrase "The remaining bits" in the last
paragraph of the section can very easily be interpreted
by someone as meaning "all the bits beyond the ones we
just described".  Better would be "The bits not specified
as the value of a constant in the list above".

-----Original Message-----
From: Myklebust, Trond 
Sent: Tuesday, November 08, 2005 1:24 AM
To: Yoder, Alan
Cc: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [nfsv4] mode bits

On Mon, 2005-11-07 at 22:05 -0800, Yoder, Alan wrote:
>  In section 5.11.5 RFC 3530 says
> 
> "The remaining bits are not defined by this protocol 
> and MUST NOT be used.  The minor version mechanism 
> must be used to define further bit usage."
> 
> I surmise that this refers to the bits MODE4_SUID, 
> MODE4_SGID and MODE4_SVTX, which are not mentioned 
> in the immediately foregoing paragraphs.

No. Doesn't it just refer to bits > 0x800?

MODE4_SUID, MODE4_SGID and MODE4_SVTX are definitely defined...

Cheers,
  Trond

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

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