From: Spencer Shepler Subject: Re: High Availability NFS Proposal Date: Mon, 26 Aug 2002 17:01:37 -0500 Sender: nfs-admin@lists.sourceforge.net Message-ID: <20020826220136.GB100566@dhcp-uaus08-128-212.sun.com> References: <20020826175418.GB110744@sheplerathome.eng.sun.com> <200208261904.g7QJ4Gd01843@localhost.localdomain> Reply-To: spencer.shepler@Sun.COM Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: spencer.shepler@Sun.COM, "Bill Rugolsky Jr." , nfs@lists.sourceforge.net, lmb@suse.de Return-path: Received: from nwkea-mail-1.sun.com ([192.18.42.13]) by usw-sf-list1.sourceforge.net with esmtp (Exim 3.31-VA-mm2 #1 (Debian)) id 17jRvn-00038n-00 for ; Mon, 26 Aug 2002 15:01:55 -0700 To: James Bottomley In-Reply-To: <200208261904.g7QJ4Gd01843@localhost.localdomain> Errors-To: nfs-admin@lists.sourceforge.net List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: Discussion of NFS under Linux development, interoperability, and testing. List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: On Mon, James Bottomley wrote: > shepler@eng.sun.com said: > > How would you propose dealing with NFSv4 where the mount and statd > > daemons are not involved with that implementation? > > Distributions are only just starting to use V3. V4 is so far out as not to > need consideration at this time. My comment was meant to draw out a discussion that with NFSv4 the user-level hooks will not be available and an in-kernel implementation would need to be considered. If the current in-kernel implementation is moving towards user-level, then future v4 work will need to be redone. -- Spencer ------------------------------------------------------- This sf.net email is sponsored by: OSDN - Tired of that same old cell phone? Get a new here for FREE! https://www.inphonic.com/r.asp?r=sourceforge1&refcode1=vs3390 _______________________________________________ NFS maillist - NFS@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nfs