Subject: [nfsv4] RFC 3530bis: lease interval vs. lease period

From: Marcel Telka <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 2 May 2014 20:26:44 +0200

In RFC 3530bis-33 there are two occurences of "lease interval" here:

<cite>
   Lease:  An interval of time defined by the server for which the
      client is irrevocably granted a lock.  At the end of a lease
      period the lock may be revoked if the lease has not been extended.
      The lock must be revoked if a conflicting lock has been granted
      after the lease interval.
                ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

...

9.5.  Lease Renewal

   The purpose of a lease is to allow a server to remove stale locks
   that are held by a client that has crashed or is otherwise
   unreachable.  It is not a mechanism for cache consistency and lease
   renewals may not be denied if the lease interval has not expired.
                                     ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
</cite>

I believe both should be changed to "lease period" to avoid confusion.

I think we should also note that the "lease period" is designated by the
lease_time server attribute.  I failed to find that in the RFC 3530bis.  The
description in 5.8.1.11. is too vague.

Thanks.

-- 
+-------------------------------------------+
| Marcel Telka   e-mail:   [email-masked]  |
|                homepage: http://telka.sk/ |
|                jabber:   [email-masked] |
+-------------------------------------------+