Subject: [nfsv4] Minutes from Feb. 16, 2006 Conference Call

From: Lisa Week <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 18 Feb 2006 10:58:13 -0700

IETF NFSv4 Working Group Conference Call
February 16, 2006
Note: Action items and attendee list is at the end of the minutes.

Agenda:
    - Closure on the pNFS layoutcommit proposed text
    - CB_RECALL_ANY proposal from Noveck
    - Sessions updates from Talpey

Agenda Additions:
    - pNFS issue related to sessions based race avoidance.
    - Identifying layouts by byte ranges.

Minutes:
------------
- Steve Fridella has sent the proposed text regarding the reclaim bit
being added to pNFS LAYOUTCOMMIT operation to the WG alias.  For the
latest version, see:
http://www1.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/nfsv4/current/msg02653.html

- Benny Halevy has introduced a proposal to add a reclaim bit to the
pNFS LAYOUTRETURN (similar to LAYOUTCOMMIT) operation and will be
sending proposed text to the WG alias.

- Tom Talpey has sent text for the Sessions based solution to callback
races to the WG alias.
See: http://www1.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/nfsv4/current/msg02607.html
Pending issue: What should a client do when it detects that the race has
happened?  It could return NFS4ERR_DELAY, but is there a more meaningful
response?

- A discussion occurred about the race conditions that the Sessions
based solution will solve.  David Black and Steve Fridella will need to
assess whether the proposal handles the pNFS EOF issue.  Tom Talpey to
look into the sections of the NFSv4.1 I-D where Sessions text would be
appropriate (e.g. - in Section 7.5.3 of the NFSv4.1 I-D which describes
the pNFS race conditions).

- Dave Noveck has sent proposed text for the CB_RECALL_ANY operation to
the WG alias.
See: http://www1.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/nfsv4/current/msg02659.html
There are no known open issues and there were no comments from the
individuals on the concall.  If there are no comments on the WG alias by
Wednesday,  Feb. 22, the text will be added to the NFSv4.1 I-D.

- A discussion occurred about what happens with pNFS layouts that have
overlapping byte ranges.  Some individuals on the call thought that
there needs to be explanatory text added to the LAYOUTGET operation
which describes what happens when layouts with overlapping byte ranges
are requested.  Benny to take a look at the existing proposal to see if
it needs to be modified.

Action Items:
------------------
AI001: Spencer to complete dot-x with 4.1 operations and post for review
Commitment date: Monday, Feb. 20

[DONE] AI002: Spencer to follow up with David Robinson on the current
stateid proposal to close discussion.
Commitment date: Monday, Feb. 13

[DONE] AI008: Tom Talpey to post about end-of-file pNFS issue and
relation to sessions
Commitment date: Monday, Feb. 13

AI010: Spencer to make clarification in the NFS4.1 I-D about the
assertion that directory delegations should be dependent on sessions.
Commitment Date: Monday, March 6

AI015: Spencer to add Implementation IDs to the minor version I-D.
Commitment Date: Monday, March 6

[DONE] AI020: Dave Noveck to send a write-up to the WG about the
outstanding
issue regarding CB_RECALL_ANY and servers that may have different
classes of storage.
Commitment Date: Wednesday, Feb. 15

[DONE] AI022: Mike Eisler to follow up with WG to see where interests in
CCM lie with respect to Minor Version I-D.
Commitment Date: Not set

AI023: Spencer to talk to Nico Williams to see if there is any ground
work that needs to be laid in NFSv4.1 for channel bindings.
Commitment Date: Monday, Feb. 20

AI025: Spencer to follow up with WG on utf8 and stringprep issues.
Included in this needs to be a discussion on the possible issues with
the interaction of internationalization and symlinks.
Commitment Date: Monday, Feb. 27

AI027: Spencer to resolve the issue of the new operation for lookup of
the parent directory in the context of SECINFO being named the same as
the existing lookup operation in the table of contents draft.
Commitment Date: Monday, March 6

AI030: Tom Talpey and Dave Noveck to work on text clarifying the
interactions between the reclaim-related operations and Sessions.
Commitment Date: Wednesday, Feb. 22

[DONE] AI034: Mike Eisler to track the suggestion of deprecating
NFS4ERR_MOVED in NFSv4.0 and replacing it with NFS4ERR_MOVED_DATA and
NFS4ERR_MOVED_DATA_AND_STATE in NFSv4.1.  See:
http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/nfsv4/current/msg02568.html
Commitment Date: Not set

AI035: Dave Noveck to send email to WG discussing which parts of the
existing migration and referral documents should be integrated into
NFSv4.1.
Commitment Date: Wednesday, Feb.15

[DONE] AI036: Brent Welch to track the issue that has been talked about
on the pNFS implementers list about when to do a LAYOUTCOMMIT.
Commitment Date: Not set

AI037: Benny Halevy to send proposal for the addition of a reclaim bit
to the pNFS LAYOUTRETURN operation.

AI038: David Black and Steve Fridella to assess whether the Sessions
based solution to callback races provided by Tom Talpey is sufficient to
solve the pNFS EOF issues.

AI039: Tom Talpey to look into the sections of the NFSv4.1 I-D where
Sessions text regarding the solution to callback races would be
appropriate (e.g. - in Section 7.5.3 of the NFSv4.1 I-D which describes
the pNFS race conditions).

AI040: Benny Halevy to take a look at the existing LAYOUTGET proposal
and assess whether it needs to be modified to handle layouts with
overlapping byte ranges.

Attendees:
----------
Lisa Week - Sun Microsystems
Spencer Shepler - Sun Microsystems
Benny Halevy - Panasas
Tom Talpey - NetApp
Mike Eisler - NetApp
Brian McCorkell - IBM
David Sheffield - IBM
Sergey - Hummingbird
Tom Vanderputten - EMC
Tom Haynes - Sun Microsystems
Sam Falkner - Sun Microsystems
Dave Marker - Sun Microsystems
Dave Noveck - NetApp
David Black - EMC
Saadia Khan - NetApp
Bruce Fields - CITI
Andy Adamson - CITI

_______________________________________________
nfsv4 mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nfsv4

---

From: Benny Halevy <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2006 15:28:24 +0200

> to the pNFS LAYOUTRETURN operation.

I sent a corrected proposal today after receiving comments from Garth Goodson.
I hope we can reach closure on this issue at or before today's conference call.

> and assess whether it needs to be modified to handle layouts with

After discussing this internally it looks like we can live with the current
draft with no change.  I am going to update the object-pnfs I-D with
some text explaining how to use byte ranges for layout* operations in
conjunction with OSD capabilities.
The gist of it is that for object-based storage each layout the client
gets is associated with a set of capabilities that are limited in use
to the devices and byte range of the received layout.
These capabilities cannot be split or merged, therefore layouts need to
be managed as indivisible units.  The byte ranges and iomode in CB_LAYOUTRECALL,
LAYOUTCOMMIT, and LAYOUTRETURN operations are used to identify a specific
layout that was returned to the client in response to LAYOUTGET.  To prevent
ambiguity the server should not allow the client to hold more than one
layout identified by the same byte range and iomode.

Benny