On Thu, 28 Feb 2008, Casey Schaufler wrote: > Easier may be pragmatic, but that does not make it right. > I suggest, that in my opinion (there, is that sufficiently > non-confrontational?) that Linux and the LSM are much better > served by a general xattr protocol than by adding a single > reccommended attribute. An xattr protocol is overkill for conveying a MAC label over the network, and would still not provide the required semantics. Please see prior discussion on this e.g. http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=120424789929258&w=2 Note that RAs are already used to convey ACLs and all other system-managed metatdata. i.e. an extensible, appropriate infrastructure already exists in the NFSv4 protocol, and has been used successfully for similar purposes. We do not need to add a new, generalized protocol to NFSv4 for this, especially one which does not meet the requirements. - James -- James Morris <jmorris@xxxxxxxxx> -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
