From: Sam Falkner Subject: Re: Re: NFSv4 ACL and POSIX interaction / mask, draft-ietf-nfsv4-acls-00 not ready Date: Sun, 23 Jul 2006 09:47:36 -0600 Message-ID: <85DB3DBD-31B4-4F71-AEFB-5919DC072AD6@Sun.COM> References: <20060721181058.GA17169@fieldses.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; delsp=yes; charset=US-ASCII Cc: Lisa Week , nfsv4@ietf.org, nfs@lists.sourceforge.net, "Noveck, Dave" , Spencer Shepler , "Pawlowski, Brian" , Andreas Gruenbacher Return-path: In-reply-to: <20060721181058.GA17169@fieldses.org> To: "J. Bruce Fields" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: nfsv4-bounces@ietf.org List-ID: On Jul 21, 2006, at 12:10 PM, J. Bruce Fields wrote: > On Fri, Jul 21, 2006 at 11:10:04AM -0400, Noveck, Dave wrote: >>> Rethinking, it would be preferable to have the ACL specification >>> specify requirements, and have the algorithms serve as examples. >> >> I think the requirements that the algorithms are intended to address, >> would be helpful in understanding, whether the algorithms are >> examples or are mandatory. > > Yes. My point wasn't necessarily that they should not be mandatory > (though I think they probably shouldn't be--I'm not yet convinced > they're actually correct), but that we need clarified whether they're > mandatory or not, and what requirements they're meant to meet, > before we > can evaluate them properly. If you have any concerns about their correctness, please let me know. As of now, there has not been a single example showing a flaw in them. I realize this is difficult without having the requirements listed explicitly -- this will be remedied very soon. >> I think this would complicate understanding and review. Even if >> the algorithms are examples and not mandatory, I would imagine >> they would be helpful in understanding the requirements and their >> implications, and if they are helpful, they should be in the spec, >> with an indication that they are illustrative and not mandatory. > > But I don't care whether they're incorporated by reference or copying. Issue 93 is tracking this. Anyone else having opinions should voice them. - Sam _______________________________________________ nfsv4 mailing list nfsv4@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nfsv4