Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-nfs-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Date:   Mon, 7 Mar 2022 10:25:52 +0100 (CET)
From:   Richard Weinberger <richard@nod.at>
To:     bfields <bfields@fieldses.org>
Cc:     linux-nfs <linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org>, david <david@sigma-star.at>,
        luis turcitu <luis.turcitu@appsbroker.com>,
        david young <david.young@appsbroker.com>,
        david oberhollenzer <david.oberhollenzer@sigma-star.at>,
        trond myklebust <trond.myklebust@hammerspace.com>,
        anna schumaker <anna.schumaker@netapp.com>,
        chris chilvers <chris.chilvers@appsbroker.com>
Message-ID: <1645735662.120362.1646645152190.JavaMail.zimbra@nod.at>
In-Reply-To: <20220217163332.GA16497@fieldses.org>
References: <20220217131531.2890-1-richard@nod.at> <20220217163332.GA16497@fieldses.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/6] nfs-utils: Improving NFS re-exports
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT
Thread-Topic: nfs-utils: Improving NFS re-exports
Thread-Index: VFS0/kQdQX7YG8wybHl+abIhZXURCQ==
Precedence: bulk

Bruce,

----- Ursprüngliche Mail -----
> Von: "bfields" <bfields@fieldses.org>

> On Thu, Feb 17, 2022 at 02:15:25PM +0100, Richard Weinberger wrote:
>> This is the second iteration of the NFS re-export improvement series for
>> nfs-utils.
>> While the kernel side didn't change at all and is still small,
>> the userspace side saw much more changes.
>> Please note that this is still an RFC, there is room for improvement.
>> 
>> The core idea is adding new export option: reeport=
>> Using reexport= it is possible to mark an export entry in the exports file
>> explicitly as NFS re-export and select a strategy how unique identifiers
>> should be provided.
>> "remote-devfsid" is the strategy I have proposed in my first patch,
>> I understand that this one is dangerous. But I still find it useful in some
>> situations.
>> "auto-fsidnum" and "predefined-fsidnum" are new and use a SQLite database as
>> backend to keep track of generated ids.
>> For a more detailed description see patch "exports: Implement new export option
>> reexport=".
> 
> Thanks, I'll try to take a look.

Did you find some cycles to think about which approach you prefer?

Thanks,
//richard