Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Mon, 11 Feb 2002 05:11:13 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Mon, 11 Feb 2002 05:11:03 -0500 Received: from patan.Sun.COM ([192.18.98.43]:39333 "EHLO patan.sun.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Mon, 11 Feb 2002 05:10:55 -0500 Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2002 04:10:20 -0600 From: Spencer Shepler To: Pavel Machek Cc: "Kendrick M. Smith" , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, nfs@lists.sourceforge.net, nfsv4-wg@sunroof.eng.sun.com Subject: Re: [NFS] Re: NFS version 4 at the University of Michigan Message-ID: <20020211041020.E100576@shepler.eng.sun.com> Reply-To: shepler@eng.sun.com Mail-Followup-To: Spencer Shepler , Pavel Machek , "Kendrick M. Smith" , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, nfs@lists.sourceforge.net, nfsv4-wg@sunroof.eng.sun.com In-Reply-To: <20020209175851.GA113@elf.ucw.cz> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20020209175851.GA113@elf.ucw.cz> User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.19i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sat, Pavel Machek wrote: > Hi! > > > This is an announcement of the first public release of NFS version 4 > > for Linux, by the University of Michigan. Up to this point, all of > > our work has been done privately, but we are now hoping to involve > > the open-source community at large. Eventually, we hope to integrate > > our NFS version 4 implementation into the Linux kernel proper, and > > find a long-term maintainter for NFS version 4 (possibly one of the > > current NFS maintainers, possibly one of us working in their spare > > time). > > Could you sumarise advantages of NFSv4 over v3? Is there usermode > server for NFSv4? What servers for v4 are known working? The highlights are: - NFSv4 allows *nix and windows clients to play well with each other (NFSv4/CIFS clients can interact appropriately). - Strong security (authentication/integrity/privacy) is required of implementations. - A single protocol instead of a collection of protocols (e.g. file locking, ACL support are in the protocol) - Delegation (similar to CIFS oplock support) allows for more aggressive caching at the client The University of Michigan/CITI work is the first to "release" but the other implementations are not far behind. We will be meeting at Connectathon in a couple of weeks to do interoperability testing. Should be a good event. -- Spencer - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/