On Feb 2, 2012, at 8:51 AM, Bryan Schumaker wrote: > On 02/01/12 18:07, Adamson, Dros wrote: > >> On Feb 1, 2012, at 5:44 PM, Boaz Harrosh wrote: >> >>> On 02/01/2012 09:06 PM, Weston Andros Adamson wrote: >>>> Don't allow invalid 'vers' and 'minorversion' combinations in mount options, >>>> such as "vers=3,minorversion=1". >>>> >>> >>> Just my $0.017 I don't see the point in this. >>> >>> If vers==3 then minorversion is ignored, just like today. >>> What kind of extra protection does it buy us? >> >> No, minorversion is not ignored when vers=3. > > > But after mounting, does setting vers=3, minorversion=1 cause any change in NFS v3 behavior? > No it doesn't. Past the parsing of options, minorversion is ignored for versions other than 4. I just don't understand how anyone can have problem with this patch. Why would we want to validate minorversion in some cases, but not all cases? How would this patch be a bad thing? It's about usability -- if this can confuse NFS developers, how are end users going to handle it? -dros
Attachment:
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
