Network File System (NFS) Version 4 Minor Version 2 Protocol
RFC 7862
| Document | Type |
RFC
- Proposed Standard
(November 2016)
Errata
Updated by RFC 8178
|
|
|---|---|---|---|
| Author | Thomas Haynes | ||
| Last updated | 2022-04-29 | ||
| RFC stream | Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) | ||
| Formats | |||
| Additional resources | Mailing list discussion | ||
| IESG | Responsible AD | Spencer Dawkins | |
| Send notices to | (None) |
RFC 7862
/*
* Allow a return of an array of contents.
*/
struct read_plus_res4 {
bool rpr_eof;
read_plus_content rpr_contents<>;
};
union READ_PLUS4res switch (nfsstat4 rp_status) {
case NFS4_OK:
read_plus_res4 rp_resok4;
default:
void;
};
<CODE ENDS>
15.10.3. DESCRIPTION
The READ_PLUS operation is based upon the NFSv4.1 READ operation (see
Section 18.22 of [RFC5661]) and similarly reads data from the regular
file identified by the current filehandle.
The client provides an rpa_offset of where the READ_PLUS is to start
and an rpa_count of how many bytes are to be read. An rpa_offset of
zero means that data will be read starting at the beginning of the
file. If rpa_offset is greater than or equal to the size of the
file, the status NFS4_OK is returned with di_length (the data length)
set to zero and eof set to TRUE.
The READ_PLUS result is comprised of an array of rpr_contents, each
of which describes a data_content4 type of data. For NFSv4.2, the
allowed values are data and hole. A server MUST support both the
data type and the hole if it uses READ_PLUS. If it does not want to
support a hole, it MUST use READ. The array contents MUST be
contiguous in the file.
Holes SHOULD be returned in their entirety -- clients must be
prepared to get more information than they requested. Both the start
and the end of the hole may exceed what was requested. If data to be
returned is comprised entirely of zeros, then the server SHOULD
return that data as a hole instead.
The server may elect to return adjacent elements of the same type.
For example, if the server has a range of data comprised entirely of
zeros and then a hole, it might want to return two adjacent holes to
the client.
Haynes Standards Track [Page 87]
RFC 7862 NFSv4.2 November 2016
If the client specifies an rpa_count value of zero, the READ_PLUS
succeeds and returns zero bytes of data. In all situations, the
server may choose to return fewer bytes than specified by the client.
The client needs to check for this condition and handle the condition
appropriately.
If the client specifies data that is entirely contained within a hole
of the file (i.e., both rpa_offset and rpa_offset + rpa_count are
within the hole), then the di_offset and di_length returned MAY be
for the entire hole. If the owner has a locked byte range covering
rpa_offset and rpa_count entirely, the di_offset and di_length MUST
NOT be extended outside the locked byte range. This result is
considered valid until the file is changed (detected via the change
attribute). The server MUST provide the same semantics for the hole
as if the client read the region and received zeros; the implied
hole's contents lifetime MUST be exactly the same as any other
read data.
If the client specifies data by an rpa_offset that begins in a
non-hole of the file but extends into a hole (the rpa_offset +
rpa_count is in the hole), the server should return an array
comprised of both data and a hole. The client MUST be prepared for
the server to return a short read describing just the data. The
client will then issue another READ_PLUS for the remaining bytes,
to which the server will respond with information about the hole in
the file.
Except when special stateids are used, the stateid value for a
READ_PLUS request represents a value returned from a previous
byte-range lock or share reservation request or the stateid
associated with a delegation. The stateid identifies the associated
owners, if any, and is used by the server to verify that the
associated locks are still valid (e.g., have not been revoked).
If the read ended at the end of the file (formally, in a correctly
formed READ_PLUS operation, if rpa_offset + rpa_count is equal to the
size of the file) or the READ_PLUS operation extends beyond the size
of the file (if rpa_offset + rpa_count is greater than the size of
the file), eof is returned as TRUE; otherwise, it is FALSE. A
successful READ_PLUS of an empty file will always return eof as TRUE.
If the current filehandle is not an ordinary file, an error will be
returned to the client. In the case that the current filehandle
represents an object of type NF4DIR, NFS4ERR_ISDIR is returned. If
the current filehandle designates a symbolic link, NFS4ERR_SYMLINK is
returned. In all other cases, NFS4ERR_WRONG_TYPE is returned.
Haynes Standards Track [Page 88]
RFC 7862 NFSv4.2 November 2016
For a READ_PLUS with a stateid value of all bits equal to zero, the
server MAY allow the READ_PLUS to be serviced subject to mandatory
byte-range locks or the current share deny modes for the file. For a
READ_PLUS with a stateid value of all bits equal to one, the server
MAY allow READ_PLUS operations to bypass locking checks at the
server.
On success, the current filehandle retains its value.
15.10.3.1. Note on Client Support of Arms of the Union
It was decided not to add a means for the client to inform the server
as to which arms of READ_PLUS it would support. In a later minor
version, it may become necessary for the introduction of a new
operation that would allow the client to inform the server as to
whether it supported the new arms of the union of data types
available in READ_PLUS.
15.10.4. IMPLEMENTATION
In general, the IMPLEMENTATION notes for READ in Section 18.22.4 of
[RFC5661] also apply to READ_PLUS.
15.10.4.1. Additional pNFS Implementation Information
With pNFS, the semantics of using READ_PLUS remains the same. Any
data server MAY return a hole result for a READ_PLUS request that it
receives. When a data server chooses to return such a result, it has
the option of returning information for the data stored on that data
server (as defined by the data layout), but it MUST NOT return
results for a byte range that includes data managed by another data
server.
If mandatory locking is enforced, then the data server must also
ensure that only information that is within the owner's locked byte
range is returned.
Haynes Standards Track [Page 89]
RFC 7862 NFSv4.2 November 2016
15.10.5. READ_PLUS with Sparse Files: Example
The following table describes a sparse file. For each byte range,
the file contains either non-zero data or a hole. In addition, the
server in this example will only create a hole if it is greater
than 32K.
+-------------+----------+
| Byte Range | Contents |
+-------------+----------+
| 0-15999 | Hole |
| 16K-31999 | Non-Zero |
| 32K-255999 | Hole |
| 256K-287999 | Non-Zero |
| 288K-353999 | Hole |
| 354K-417999 | Non-Zero |
+-------------+----------+
Table 7: Sparse File
Under the given circumstances, if a client was to read from the file
with a maximum read size of 64K, the following will be the results
for the given READ_PLUS calls. This assumes that the client has
already opened the file, acquired a valid stateid ("s" in the
example), and just needs to issue READ_PLUS requests.
1. READ_PLUS(s, 0, 64K) --> NFS_OK, eof = FALSE, <data[0,32K],
hole[32K,224K]>. Since the first hole is less than the server's
minimum hole size, the first 32K of the file is returned as data
and the remaining 32K is returned as a hole that actually extends
to 256K.
2. READ_PLUS(s, 32K, 64K) --> NFS_OK, eof = FALSE, <hole[32K,224K]>.
The requested range was all zeros, and the current hole begins at
offset 32K and is 224K in length. Note that the client should
not have followed up the previous READ_PLUS request with this
one, as the hole information from the previous call extended past
what the client was requesting.
3. READ_PLUS(s, 256K, 64K) --> NFS_OK, eof = FALSE, <data[256K,
288K], hole[288K, 354K]>. Returns an array of the 32K data and
the hole, which extends to 354K.
4. READ_PLUS(s, 354K, 64K) --> NFS_OK, eof = TRUE, <data[354K,
418K]>. Returns the final 64K of data and informs the client
that there is no more data in the file.
Haynes Standards Track [Page 90]
RFC 7862 NFSv4.2 November 2016
15.11. Operation 69: SEEK - Find the next data or hole
15.11.1. ARGUMENT
<CODE BEGINS>
enum data_content4 {
NFS4_CONTENT_DATA = 0,
NFS4_CONTENT_HOLE = 1
};
struct SEEK4args {
/* CURRENT_FH: file */
stateid4 sa_stateid;
offset4 sa_offset;
data_content4 sa_what;
};
<CODE ENDS>
15.11.2. RESULT
<CODE BEGINS>
struct seek_res4 {
bool sr_eof;
offset4 sr_offset;
};
union SEEK4res switch (nfsstat4 sa_status) {
case NFS4_OK:
seek_res4 resok4;
default:
void;
};
<CODE ENDS>
15.11.3. DESCRIPTION
SEEK is an operation that allows a client to determine the location
of the next data_content4 in a file. It allows an implementation of
the emerging extension to the lseek(2) function to allow clients to
determine the next hole whilst in data or the next data whilst in
a hole.
Haynes Standards Track [Page 91]
RFC 7862 NFSv4.2 November 2016
From the given sa_offset, find the next data_content4 of type sa_what
in the file. If the server cannot find a corresponding sa_what, then
the status will still be NFS4_OK, but sr_eof would be TRUE. If the
server can find the sa_what, then the sr_offset is the start of that
content. If the sa_offset is beyond the end of the file, then SEEK
MUST return NFS4ERR_NXIO.
All files MUST have a virtual hole at the end of the file. That is,
if a file system does not support sparse files, then a COMPOUND with
{SEEK 0 NFS4_CONTENT_HOLE;} would return a result of {SEEK 1 X;},
where "X" was the size of the file.
SEEK must follow the same rules for stateids as READ_PLUS
(Section 15.10.3).
15.12. Operation 70: WRITE_SAME - WRITE an ADB multiple times to a file
15.12.1. ARGUMENT
<CODE BEGINS>
enum stable_how4 {
UNSTABLE4 = 0,
DATA_SYNC4 = 1,
FILE_SYNC4 = 2
};
struct app_data_block4 {
offset4 adb_offset;
length4 adb_block_size;
length4 adb_block_count;
length4 adb_reloff_blocknum;
count4 adb_block_num;
length4 adb_reloff_pattern;
opaque adb_pattern<>;
};
struct WRITE_SAME4args {
/* CURRENT_FH: file */
stateid4 wsa_stateid;
stable_how4 wsa_stable;
app_data_block4 wsa_adb;
};
<CODE ENDS>
Haynes Standards Track [Page 92]
RFC 7862 NFSv4.2 November 2016
15.12.2. RESULT
<CODE BEGINS>
struct write_response4 {
stateid4 wr_callback_id<1>;
length4 wr_count;
stable_how4 wr_committed;
verifier4 wr_writeverf;
};
union WRITE_SAME4res switch (nfsstat4 wsr_status) {
case NFS4_OK:
write_response4 resok4;
default:
void;
};
<CODE ENDS>
15.12.3. DESCRIPTION
The WRITE_SAME operation writes an application data block to the
regular file identified by the current filehandle (see
WRITE SAME (10) in [T10-SBC2]). The target file is specified by the
current filehandle. The data to be written is specified by an
app_data_block4 structure (Section 8.1.1). The client specifies with
the wsa_stable parameter the method of how the data is to be
processed by the server. It is treated like the stable parameter in
the NFSv4.1 WRITE operation (see Section 18.32.3 of [RFC5661]).
A successful WRITE_SAME will construct a reply for wr_count,
wr_committed, and wr_writeverf as per the NFSv4.1 WRITE operation
results. If wr_callback_id is set, it indicates an asynchronous
reply (see Section 15.12.3.1).
As it is an OPTIONAL operation, WRITE_SAME has to support
NFS4ERR_NOTSUPP. As it is an extension of WRITE, it has to support
all of the errors returned by WRITE. If the client supports
WRITE_SAME, it MUST support CB_OFFLOAD.
If the server supports ADBs, then it MUST support the WRITE_SAME
operation. The server has no concept of the structure imposed by the
application. It is only when the application writes to a section of
the file does order get imposed. In order to detect corruption even
before the application utilizes the file, the application will want
to initialize a range of ADBs using WRITE_SAME.
Haynes Standards Track [Page 93]
RFC 7862 NFSv4.2 November 2016
When the client invokes the WRITE_SAME operation, it wants to record
the block structure described by the app_data_block4 into the file.
When the server receives the WRITE_SAME operation, it MUST populate
adb_block_count ADBs in the file, starting at adb_offset. The block
size will be given by adb_block_size. The ADBN (if provided) will
start at adb_reloff_blocknum, and each block will be monotonically
numbered, starting from adb_block_num in the first block. The
pattern (if provided) will be at adb_reloff_pattern of each block and
will be provided in adb_pattern.
The server SHOULD return an asynchronous result if it can determine
that the operation will be long-running (see Section 15.12.3.1).
Once either the WRITE_SAME finishes synchronously or the server uses
CB_OFFLOAD to inform the client of the asynchronous completion of the
WRITE_SAME, the server MUST return the ADBs to clients as data.
15.12.3.1. Asynchronous Transactions
ADB initialization may cause a server to decide to service the
operation asynchronously. If it decides to do so, it sets the
stateid in wr_callback_id to be that of the wsa_stateid. If it does
not set the wr_callback_id, then the result is synchronous.
When the client determines that the reply will be given
asynchronously, it should not assume anything about the contents of
what it wrote until it is informed by the server that the operation
is complete. It can use OFFLOAD_STATUS (Section 15.9) to monitor the
operation and OFFLOAD_CANCEL (Section 15.8) to cancel the operation.
An example of an asynchronous WRITE_SAME is shown in Figure 6. Note
that, as with the COPY operation, WRITE_SAME must provide a stateid
for tracking the asynchronous operation.
Haynes Standards Track [Page 94]
RFC 7862 NFSv4.2 November 2016
Client Server
+ +
| |
|--- OPEN ---------------------------->| Client opens
|<------------------------------------/| the file
| |
|--- WRITE_SAME ---------------------->| Client initializes
|<------------------------------------/| an ADB
| |
| |
|--- OFFLOAD_STATUS ------------------>| Client may poll
|<------------------------------------/| for status
| |
| . | Multiple OFFLOAD_STATUS
| . | operations may be sent.
| . |
| |
|<-- CB_OFFLOAD -----------------------| Server reports results
|\------------------------------------>|
| |
|--- CLOSE --------------------------->| Client closes
|<------------------------------------/| the file
| |
| |
Figure 6: An Asynchronous WRITE_SAME
When CB_OFFLOAD informs the client of the successful WRITE_SAME, the
write_response4 embedded in the operation will provide the necessary
information that a synchronous WRITE_SAME would have provided.
Regardless of whether the operation is asynchronous or synchronous,
it MUST still support the COMMIT operation semantics as outlined in
Section 18.3 of [RFC5661]. That is, COMMIT works on one or more
WRITE operations, and the WRITE_SAME operation can appear as several
WRITE operations to the server. The client can use locking
operations to control the behavior on the server with respect to
long-running asynchronous WRITE_SAME operations.
15.12.3.2. Error Handling of a Partially Complete WRITE_SAME
WRITE_SAME will clone adb_block_count copies of the given ADB in
consecutive order in the file, starting at adb_offset. An error can
occur after writing the Nth ADB to the file. WRITE_SAME MUST appear
to populate the range of the file as if the client used WRITE to
transfer the instantiated ADBs. That is, the contents of the range
will be easy for the client to determine in the case of a partially
complete WRITE_SAME.
Haynes Standards Track [Page 95]
RFC 7862 NFSv4.2 November 2016
15.13. Operation 71: CLONE - Clone a range of a file into another file
15.13.1. ARGUMENT
<CODE BEGINS>
struct CLONE4args {
/* SAVED_FH: source file */
/* CURRENT_FH: destination file */
stateid4 cl_src_stateid;
stateid4 cl_dst_stateid;
offset4 cl_src_offset;
offset4 cl_dst_offset;
length4 cl_count;
};
<CODE ENDS>
15.13.2. RESULT
<CODE BEGINS>
struct CLONE4res {
nfsstat4 cl_status;
};
<CODE ENDS>
15.13.3. DESCRIPTION
The CLONE operation is used to clone file content from a source file
specified by the SAVED_FH value into a destination file specified by
CURRENT_FH without actually copying the data, e.g., by using a
copy-on-write mechanism.
Both SAVED_FH and CURRENT_FH must be regular files. If either
SAVED_FH or CURRENT_FH is not a regular file, the operation MUST fail
and return NFS4ERR_WRONG_TYPE.
The ca_dst_stateid MUST refer to a stateid that is valid for a WRITE
operation and follows the rules for stateids in Sections 8.2.5 and
18.32.3 of [RFC5661]. The ca_src_stateid MUST refer to a stateid
that is valid for a READ operation and follows the rules for stateids
in Sections 8.2.5 and 18.22.3 of [RFC5661]. If either stateid is
invalid, then the operation MUST fail.
Haynes Standards Track [Page 96]
RFC 7862 NFSv4.2 November 2016
The cl_src_offset is the starting offset within the source file from
which the data to be cloned will be obtained, and the cl_dst_offset
is the starting offset of the target region into which the cloned
data will be placed. An offset of 0 (zero) indicates the start of
the respective file. The number of bytes to be cloned is obtained
from cl_count, except that a cl_count of 0 (zero) indicates that the
number of bytes to be cloned is the count of bytes between
cl_src_offset and the EOF of the source file. Both cl_src_offset and
cl_dst_offset must be aligned to the clone block size
(Section 12.2.1). The number of bytes to be cloned must be a
multiple of the clone block size, except in the case in which
cl_src_offset plus the number of bytes to be cloned is equal to the
source file size.
If the source offset or the source offset plus count is greater than
the size of the source file, the operation MUST fail with
NFS4ERR_INVAL. The destination offset or destination offset plus
count may be greater than the size of the destination file.
If SAVED_FH and CURRENT_FH refer to the same file and the source and
target ranges overlap, the operation MUST fail with NFS4ERR_INVAL.
If the target area of the CLONE operation ends beyond the end of the
destination file, the offset at the end of the target area will
determine the new size of the destination file. The contents of any
block not part of the target area will be the same as if the file
size were extended by a WRITE.
If the area to be cloned is not a multiple of the clone block size
and the size of the destination file is past the end of the target
area, the area between the end of the target area and the next
multiple of the clone block size will be zeroed.
The CLONE operation is atomic in that other operations may not see
any intermediate states between the state of the two files before the
operation and after the operation. READs of the destination file
will never see some blocks of the target area cloned without all of
them being cloned. WRITEs of the source area will either have no
effect on the data of the target file or be fully reflected in the
target area of the destination file.
The completion status of the operation is indicated by cr_status.
Haynes Standards Track [Page 97]
RFC 7862 NFSv4.2 November 2016
16. NFSv4.2 Callback Operations
16.1. Operation 15: CB_OFFLOAD - Report the results of an asynchronous
operation
16.1.1. ARGUMENT
<CODE BEGINS>
struct write_response4 {
stateid4 wr_callback_id<1>;
length4 wr_count;
stable_how4 wr_committed;
verifier4 wr_writeverf;
};
union offload_info4 switch (nfsstat4 coa_status) {
case NFS4_OK:
write_response4 coa_resok4;
default:
length4 coa_bytes_copied;
};
struct CB_OFFLOAD4args {
nfs_fh4 coa_fh;
stateid4 coa_stateid;
offload_info4 coa_offload_info;
};
<CODE ENDS>
16.1.2. RESULT
<CODE BEGINS>
struct CB_OFFLOAD4res {
nfsstat4 cor_status;
};
<CODE ENDS>
Haynes Standards Track [Page 98]
RFC 7862 NFSv4.2 November 2016
16.1.3. DESCRIPTION
CB_OFFLOAD is used to report to the client the results of an
asynchronous operation, e.g., server-side COPY or WRITE_SAME. The
coa_fh and coa_stateid identify the transaction, and the coa_status
indicates success or failure. The coa_resok4.wr_callback_id MUST NOT
be set. If the transaction failed, then the coa_bytes_copied
contains the number of bytes copied before the failure occurred. The
coa_bytes_copied value indicates the number of bytes copied but not
which specific bytes have been copied.
If the client supports any of the following operations:
COPY: for both intra-server and inter-server asynchronous copies
WRITE_SAME: for ADB initialization
then the client is REQUIRED to support the CB_OFFLOAD operation.
There is a potential race between the reply to the original
transaction on the forechannel and the CB_OFFLOAD callback on the
backchannel. Section 2.10.6.3 of [RFC5661] describes how to handle
this type of issue.
Upon success, the coa_resok4.wr_count presents for each operation:
COPY: the total number of bytes copied
WRITE_SAME: the same information that a synchronous WRITE_SAME would
provide
17. Security Considerations
NFSv4.2 has all of the security concerns present in NFSv4.1 (see
Section 21 of [RFC5661]), as well as those present in the server-side
copy (see Section 4.9) and in Labeled NFS (see Section 9.6).
18. IANA Considerations
The IANA considerations for Labeled NFS are addressed in [RFC7569].
Haynes Standards Track [Page 99]
RFC 7862 NFSv4.2 November 2016
19. References
19.1. Normative References
[posix_fadvise]
The Open Group, "Section 'posix_fadvise()' of System
Interfaces of The Open Group Base Specifications Issue 7",
IEEE Std 1003.1, 2016 Edition (HTML Version),
ISBN 1937218812, September 2016,
<http://www.opengroup.org/>.
[posix_fallocate]
The Open Group, "Section 'posix_fallocate()' of System
Interfaces of The Open Group Base Specifications Issue 7",
IEEE Std 1003.1, 2016 Edition (HTML Version),
ISBN 1937218812, September 2016,
<http://www.opengroup.org/>.
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119,
DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>.
[RFC3986] Berners-Lee, T., Fielding, R., and L. Masinter, "Uniform
Resource Identifier (URI): Generic Syntax", STD 66,
RFC 3986, DOI 10.17487/RFC3986, January 2005,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3986>.
[RFC5661] Shepler, S., Ed., Eisler, M., Ed., and D. Noveck, Ed.,
"Network File System (NFS) Version 4 Minor Version 1
Protocol", RFC 5661, DOI 10.17487/RFC5661, January 2010,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5661>.
[RFC5662] Shepler, S., Ed., Eisler, M., Ed., and D. Noveck, Ed.,
"Network File System (NFS) Version 4 Minor Version 1
External Data Representation Standard (XDR) Description",
RFC 5662, DOI 10.17487/RFC5662, January 2010,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5662>.
[RFC7569] Quigley, D., Lu, J., and T. Haynes, "Registry
Specification for Mandatory Access Control (MAC) Security
Label Formats", RFC 7569, DOI 10.17487/RFC7569, July 2015,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7569>.
Haynes Standards Track [Page 100]
RFC 7862 NFSv4.2 November 2016
[RFC7861] Adamson, A. and N. Williams, "Remote Procedure Call (RPC)
Security Version 3", RFC 7861, DOI 10.17487/RFC7861,
November 2016, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7861>.
[RFC7863] Haynes, T., "Network File System (NFS) Version 4 Minor
Version 2 External Data Representation Standard (XDR)
Description", RFC 7863, DOI 10.17487/RFC7863,
November 2016, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7863>.
19.2. Informative References
[Ashdown08]
Ashdown, L., "Chapter 15: Validating Database Files and
Backups", Oracle Database Backup and Recovery User's
Guide 11g Release 1 (11.1), August 2008,
<http://download.oracle.com/docs/cd/B28359_01/backup.111/
b28270/rcmvalid.htm>.
[Baira08] Bairavasundaram, L., Goodson, G., Schroeder, B.,
Arpaci-Dusseau, A., and R. Arpaci-Dusseau, "An Analysis of
Data Corruption in the Storage Stack", Proceedings of the
6th USENIX Symposium on File and Storage Technologies
(FAST '08), 2008,
<http://www.usenix.org/events/fast08/tech/full_papers/
bairavasundaram/bairavasundaram.pdf>.
[IESG08] IESG, "IESG Processing of RFC Errata for the IETF Stream",
July 2008, <https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/
errata-processing.html>.
[LB96] LaPadula, L. and D. Bell, "MITRE Technical Report 2547,
Volume II", Journal of Computer Security, Volume 4,
Issue 2-3, 239-263, IOS Press, Amsterdam, The Netherlands,
January 1996.
[McDougall07]
McDougall, R. and J. Mauro, "Section 11.4.3: Detecting
Memory Corruption", Solaris Internals: Solaris 10 and
OpenSolaris Kernel Architecture, 2nd Edition, 2007.
[NFSv4-Versioning]
Noveck, D., "Rules for NFSv4 Extensions and Minor
Versions", Work in Progress,
draft-ietf-nfsv4-versioning-07, October 2016.
[RFC959] Postel, J. and J. Reynolds, "File Transfer Protocol",
STD 9, RFC 959, DOI 10.17487/RFC0959, October 1985,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc959>.
Haynes Standards Track [Page 101]
RFC 7862 NFSv4.2 November 2016
[RFC1108] Kent, S., "U.S. Department of Defense Security Options for
the Internet Protocol", RFC 1108, DOI 10.17487/RFC1108,
November 1991, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc1108>.
[RFC2401] Kent, S. and R. Atkinson, "Security Architecture for the
Internet Protocol", RFC 2401, DOI 10.17487/RFC2401,
November 1998, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2401>.
[RFC4506] Eisler, M., Ed., "XDR: External Data Representation
Standard", STD 67, RFC 4506, DOI 10.17487/RFC4506,
May 2006, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4506>.
[RFC4949] Shirey, R., "Internet Security Glossary, Version 2",
FYI 36, RFC 4949, DOI 10.17487/RFC4949, August 2007,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4949>.
[RFC5663] Black, D., Fridella, S., and J. Glasgow, "Parallel NFS
(pNFS) Block/Volume Layout", RFC 5663,
DOI 10.17487/RFC5663, January 2010,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5663>.
[RFC7204] Haynes, T., "Requirements for Labeled NFS", RFC 7204,
DOI 10.17487/RFC7204, April 2014,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7204>.
[RFC7230] Fielding, R., Ed., and J. Reschke, Ed., "Hypertext
Transfer Protocol (HTTP/1.1): Message Syntax and Routing",
RFC 7230, DOI 10.17487/RFC7230, June 2014,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7230>.
[RFC7530] Haynes, T., Ed., and D. Noveck, Ed., "Network File System
(NFS) Version 4 Protocol", RFC 7530, DOI 10.17487/RFC7530,
March 2015, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7530>.
[Strohm11] Strohm, R., "Chapter 2: Data Blocks, Extents, and
Segments", Oracle Database Concepts 11g Release 1 (11.1),
January 2011,
<http://download.oracle.com/docs/cd/B28359_01/server.111/
b28318/logical.htm>.
[T10-SBC2] Elliott, R., Ed., "ANSI INCITS 405-2005, Information
Technology - SCSI Block Commands - 2 (SBC-2)",
November 2004,
<ftp://www.t10.org/t10/document.05/05-344r0.pdf>.
Haynes Standards Track [Page 102]
RFC 7862 NFSv4.2 November 2016
Acknowledgments
Tom Haynes would like to thank NetApp, Inc. for its funding of his
time on this project.
For the topic "sharing change attribute implementation
characteristics with NFSv4 clients", the original document was by
Trond Myklebust.
For the NFS server-side copy, the original document was by James
Lentini, Mike Eisler, Deepak Kenchammana, Anshul Madan, and Rahul
Iyer. Tom Talpey co-authored an unpublished version of that
document. It was also reviewed by a number of individuals: Pranoop
Erasani, Tom Haynes, Arthur Lent, Trond Myklebust, Dave Noveck,
Theresa Lingutla-Raj, Manjunath Shankararao, Satyam Vaghani, and Nico
Williams. Anna Schumaker's early prototyping experience helped us
avoid some traps. Also, both Olga Kornievskaia and Andy Adamson
brought implementation experience to the use of copy stateids in the
inter-server copy. Jorge Mora was able to optimize the handling of
errors for the result of COPY.
For the NFS space reservation operations, the original document was
by Mike Eisler, James Lentini, Manjunath Shankararao, and Rahul Iyer.
For the sparse file support, the original document was by Dean
Hildebrand and Marc Eshel. Valuable input and advice was received
from Sorin Faibish, Bruce Fields, Benny Halevy, Trond Myklebust, and
Richard Scheffenegger.
For the application I/O hints, the original document was by Dean
Hildebrand, Mike Eisler, Trond Myklebust, and Sam Falkner. Some
early reviewers included Benny Halevy and Pranoop Erasani.
For Labeled NFS, the original document was by David Quigley, James
Morris, Jarrett Lu, and Tom Haynes. Peter Staubach, Trond Myklebust,
Stephen Smalley, Sorin Faibish, Nico Williams, and David Black also
contributed in the final push to get this accepted.
Christoph Hellwig was very helpful in getting the WRITE_SAME
semantics to model more of what T10 was doing for WRITE SAME (10)
[T10-SBC2]. And he led the push to get space reservations to more
closely model the posix_fallocate() operation.
Andy Adamson picked up the RPCSEC_GSSv3 work, which enabled both
Labeled NFS and server-side copy to provide more secure options.
Christoph Hellwig provided the update to GETDEVICELIST.
Haynes Standards Track [Page 103]
RFC 7862 NFSv4.2 November 2016
Jorge Mora provided a very detailed review and caught some important
issues with the tables.
During the review process, Talia Reyes-Ortiz helped the sessions run
smoothly. While many people contributed here and there, the core
reviewers were Andy Adamson, Pranoop Erasani, Bruce Fields, Chuck
Lever, Trond Myklebust, David Noveck, Peter Staubach, and Mike
Kupfer.
Elwyn Davies was the General Area Reviewer for this document, and his
insights as to the relationship of this document and both [RFC5661]
and [RFC7530] were very much appreciated!
Author's Address
Thomas Haynes
Primary Data, Inc.
4300 El Camino Real Ste 100
Los Altos, CA 94022
United States of America
Phone: +1 408 215 1519
Email: thomas.haynes@primarydata.com
Haynes Standards Track [Page 104]