On 02/07/2012 01:48 PM, Myklebust, Trond wrote: > On Tue, 2012-02-07 at 13:41 -0500, Trond Myklebust wrote: >> That said, I see the 'vers=4' being reserved for auto-negotiation of >> minor version, and the 'vers=4.x' as requiring a specific minor version >> number. >> The way auto-negotiation is supposed to work is laid out in >> RFC3530(-bis): the client attempts the largest minor version that it >> supports, and the server replies with an OK, or a MINOR_VERSION_MISMATCH >> depending on whether it supports that minor version or not. If not, the >> client retries with the next largest minor version, .... rince, repeat >> until successful... > > BTW: There is no reason why we should need to do this auto-negotiation > in kernel space. As we've learned with major version negotiation, it can > be more flexible to just teach the 'mount' command to do the actual > probing, since that allows the user better control over the process via > global configuration files... > +1 Its also much easier to debug and fix bugs... People are much more willing to take a mount command update than a kernel update... steved. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-nfs" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
