[pnfs] pNFS testing at connectathon

[Iyer, Rahul]

OK, then -08 is what we'll work with.
Regards
Rahul


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Lisa Week [mailto:Lisa.Week at Sun.COM] 
> Sent: Wednesday, December 20, 2006 2:35 PM
> To: Iyer, Rahul
> Cc: William A. (Andy) Adamson; pnfs at linux-nfs.org
> Subject: Re: [pnfs] pNFS testing at connectathon
> 
> Hi Rahul,
> 
> >I was working of the minorversion1-07 dot-x file. Will it be 
> too much 
> >of a problem for us to stick to this one? I haven't read the 
> -08 dot-x 
> >file yet. I'm yet to integrate the sessions code with pNFS and I'd 
> >appreciate if I didn't need to go implement new ops, not to 
> mention any 
> >XDR changes, given the remaining time. So, unless it will be 
> a lot of 
> >trouble, I'd like to stick with the -07 dot-x.
> >  
> >
> We have already moved our implementation forward to the 
> minorversion1-08 dot-x file.  Sorry, but it is doubtful that 
> we can go back to the
> minorversion1-07 dot-x.
> 
> Given that we have already moved forward to -08, it would 
> take some work to revert our implementation back to -07.  
> Unfortunately, the work to revert to -07 would just put us 
> behind where we are right now and it is hard to justify that. 
>  Therefore, we would like to take -08 based implementations 
> to Connectathon.
> 
> So, what do you think?
> 
> Thanks,
> Lisa
> 
> >
> >  
> >
> >>-----Original Message-----
> >>From: Lisa Week [mailto:Lisa.Week at Sun.COM]
> >>Sent: Tuesday, December 19, 2006 10:18 PM
> >>To: Iyer, Rahul
> >>Cc: William A. (Andy) Adamson; pnfs at linux-nfs.org
> >>Subject: Re: [pnfs] pNFS testing at connectathon
> >>
> >>Hi Rahul,
> >>
> >>Thanks for the info.
> >>
> >>    
> >>
> >>>>The only thing I wonder is - could we get more details about what 
> >>>>Sessions ops you are planning to have implemented at
> >>>>        
> >>>>
> >>Connectathon.  
> >>    
> >>
> >>>>More specifically, what ops do you mean when you say "the
> >>>>        
> >>>>
> >>sessions op
> >>    
> >>
> >>>>to replace the clientid we've added to several pNFS operations"?
> >>>>        
> >>>>
> >>>I'm doing the sessions bit for the client right now. The
> >>>      
> >>>
> >>ops I support
> >>    
> >>
> >>>are create_clientid, create_session, sequence and (not yet,  but
> >>>hopefully) destroy session. On the callback path
> >>>      
> >>>
> >>CB_SEQUENCE will be
> >>    
> >>
> >>>all I support.
> >>>      
> >>>
> >>Would you be able to tell me which version of the dot-x 
> file that you 
> >>are using for your Sessions implementation (i.e.
> >>which minor version draft does it correspond to)?
> >>
> >>I apologize if I have misunderstood something, but...
> >>By the time Connectathon comes around do you intend to be on the
> >>draft-ietf-nfsv4-minorversion1-08 dot-x file?  In other 
> words, can you 
> >>commit to supporting EXCHANGE_ID in lieu of CREATE_CLIENTID?
> >>
> >>Just for clarification, here is the dot-x file that we are working
> >>toward: http://nfsv4-editor.org/draft-08/nfsv41.x
> >>
> >>    
> >>
> >>>>Also, are you planning to have both client and server 
> with pNFS and 
> >>>>Sessions functionality at Connectathon?
> >>>>        
> >>>>
> >>>Yes. I will be integrating sessions and pNFS on the Linux client.I 
> >>>will be doing the same on the Netapp server too. However, 
> I have put 
> >>>in minimal stubs for the Linux server. One of Andy, Marc or
> >>>      
> >>>
> >>Benny mostly
> >>    
> >>
> >>>will integrate this with pNFS.
> >>>      
> >>>
> >>Okay.
> >>
> >>Thanks,
> >>Lisa
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>    
> >>
>