Subject: [nfsv4] draft-ietf-nfsv4-flex-files-05 review

From: Benny Halevy <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2015 12:34:12 +0200

Tom,

Thanks for the draft update.
Following are a few minor comments for your consideration.

Thanks,

Benny

1) Section 2.1. LAYOUTCOMMIT
>
> With a loosely coupled system, a LAYOUTCOMMIT to the metadata server MUST
> be proceeded with a COMMIT to the storage device.

It would be technically correct to restrict this requirement "when the
data server had not previously committed the data file's written data
as STABLE_FILE"

2) Section 2.2. Security Models

s/it forced/it is forced/

s/can hand out/MAY hand out/
to make it clear that's up to the metadata server's policy

3) Section 2.2.2. Example of using Synthetic uids/gids

s/modificaations/modifications/

4) Section 5.1. ff_layout4

> For loosely coupled storage devices, ffds_user and ffds_group provide
> credentials to be used by the client to access the data files.

Since ffds_user and ffds_group are per data file, I'd consider
rephrasing the above as:

For loosely coupled storage devices, ffds_user and ffds_group provide
credentials to be used by the client to access each data file.

5) References, [NFSv42]

At the time of this update, draft-ietf-nfsv4-minorversion2 is already at -30
Although RFC Editor needs to fix this anyhow before this draft can be
come an rfc
-30 changed lea_errors into lea_errors<> and that provides the
justification for repeating
this change here...