[Docs] [txt|pdf] [Tracker] [WG] [Email] [Diff1] [Diff2] [Nits]

Versions: (draft-haynes-nfsv4-minorversion2) 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27

NFSv4                                                     T. Haynes, Ed.
Internet-Draft                                                    NetApp
Intended status: Standards Track                       February 03, 2014
Expires: August 7, 2014


                     NFS Version 4 Minor Version 2
                 draft-ietf-nfsv4-minorversion2-21.txt

Abstract

   This Internet-Draft describes NFS version 4 minor version two,
   focusing mainly on the protocol extensions made from NFS version 4
   minor version 0 and NFS version 4 minor version 1.  Major extensions
   introduced in NFS version 4 minor version two include: Server-side
   Copy, Application I/O Advise, Space Reservations, Sparse Files,
   Application Data Blocks, and Labeled NFS.

Requirements Language

   The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
   "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
   document are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119 [RFC2119].

Status of this Memo

   This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
   provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.

   Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
   Task Force (IETF).  Note that other groups may also distribute
   working documents as Internet-Drafts.  The list of current Internet-
   Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.

   Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
   and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
   time.  It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
   material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."

   This Internet-Draft will expire on August 7, 2014.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2014 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
   document authors.  All rights reserved.

   This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
   Provisions Relating to IETF Documents



Haynes                   Expires August 7, 2014                 [Page 1]

Internet-Draft                   NFSv4.2                   February 2014


   (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
   publication of this document.  Please review these documents
   carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
   to this document.  Code Components extracted from this document must
   include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
   the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
   described in the Simplified BSD License.


Table of Contents

   1.  Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  5
     1.1.   The NFS Version 4 Minor Version 2 Protocol  . . . . . . .  5
     1.2.   Scope of This Document  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  5
     1.3.   NFSv4.2 Goals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  5
     1.4.   Overview of NFSv4.2 Features  . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  6
       1.4.1.  Server-side Copy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  6
       1.4.2.  Application I/O Advise . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  6
       1.4.3.  Sparse Files . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  6
       1.4.4.  Space Reservation  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  6
       1.4.5.  Application Data Hole (ADH) Support  . . . . . . . . .  6
       1.4.6.  Labeled NFS  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  6
     1.5.   Differences from NFSv4.1  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  7
   2.  Minor Versioning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  7
   3.  Server-side Copy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
     3.1.   Introduction  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
     3.2.   Protocol Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
       3.2.1.  Overview of Copy Operations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
       3.2.2.  Locking the Files  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
       3.2.3.  Intra-Server Copy  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
       3.2.4.  Inter-Server Copy  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
       3.2.5.  Server-to-Server Copy Protocol . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
     3.3.   Requirements for Operations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
       3.3.1.  netloc4 - Network Locations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
       3.3.2.  Copy Offload Stateids  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
     3.4.   Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
       3.4.1.  Inter-Server Copy Security . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
   4.  Support for Application IO Hints . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
   5.  Sparse Files . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
     5.1.   Introduction  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
     5.2.   Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
     5.3.   New Operations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
       5.3.1.  READ_PLUS  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
       5.3.2.  WRITE_PLUS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
   6.  Space Reservation  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
     6.1.   Introduction  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
   7.  Application Data Hole Support  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
     7.1.   Generic Framework . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36



Haynes                   Expires August 7, 2014                 [Page 2]

Internet-Draft                   NFSv4.2                   February 2014


       7.1.1.  Data Hole Representation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
       7.1.2.  Data Content . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
     7.2.   An Example of Detecting Corruption  . . . . . . . . . . . 38
     7.3.   Example of READ_PLUS  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
   8.  Labeled NFS  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
     8.1.   Introduction  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
     8.2.   Definitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
     8.3.   MAC Security Attribute  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
       8.3.1.  Delegations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
       8.3.2.  Permission Checking  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
       8.3.3.  Object Creation  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
       8.3.4.  Existing Objects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
       8.3.5.  Label Changes  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
     8.4.   pNFS Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44
     8.5.   Discovery of Server Labeled NFS Support . . . . . . . . . 44
     8.6.   MAC Security NFS Modes of Operation . . . . . . . . . . . 44
       8.6.1.  Full Mode  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44
       8.6.2.  Guest Mode . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46
     8.7.   Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46
   9.  Sharing change attribute implementation details with NFSv4
       clients  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47
     9.1.   Introduction  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47
   10. Security Considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47
   11. Error Values . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47
     11.1.  Error Definitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
       11.1.1. General Errors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
       11.1.2. Server to Server Copy Errors . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
       11.1.3. Labeled NFS Errors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
     11.2.  New Operations and Their Valid Errors . . . . . . . . . . 49
     11.3.  New Callback Operations and Their Valid Errors  . . . . . 52
   12. New File Attributes  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53
     12.1.  New RECOMMENDED Attributes - List and Definition
            References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53
     12.2.  Attribute Definitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53
   13. Operations: REQUIRED, RECOMMENDED, or OPTIONAL . . . . . . . . 57
   14. NFSv4.2 Operations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60
     14.1.  Operation 59: COPY - Initiate a server-side copy  . . . . 60
     14.2.  Operation 60: OFFLOAD_ABORT - Cancel a server-side
            copy  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64
     14.3.  Operation 61: COPY_NOTIFY - Notify a source server of
            a future copy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65
     14.4.  Operation 62: OFFLOAD_REVOKE - Revoke a destination
            server's copy privileges  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66
     14.5.  Operation 63: OFFLOAD_STATUS - Poll for status of a
            server-side copy  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67
     14.6.  Modification to Operation 42: EXCHANGE_ID -
            Instantiate Client ID . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68
     14.7.  Operation 64: WRITE_PLUS  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69



Haynes                   Expires August 7, 2014                 [Page 3]

Internet-Draft                   NFSv4.2                   February 2014


     14.8.  Operation 67: IO_ADVISE - Application I/O access
            pattern hints . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75
     14.9.  Changes to Operation 51: LAYOUTRETURN . . . . . . . . . . 80
     14.10. Operation 65: READ_PLUS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83
     14.11. Operation 66: SEEK  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 88
   15. NFSv4.2 Callback Operations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89
     15.1.  Operation 15: CB_OFFLOAD - Report results of an
            asynchronous operation  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89
   16. IANA Considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90
   17. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90
     17.1.  Normative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90
     17.2.  Informative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 91
   Appendix A.  Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 92
   Appendix B.  RFC Editor Notes  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93
   Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 94




































Haynes                   Expires August 7, 2014                 [Page 4]

Internet-Draft                   NFSv4.2                   February 2014


1.  Introduction

1.1.  The NFS Version 4 Minor Version 2 Protocol

   The NFS version 4 minor version 2 (NFSv4.2) protocol is the third
   minor version of the NFS version 4 (NFSv4) protocol.  The first minor
   version, NFSv4.0, is described in [I-D.ietf-nfsv4-rfc3530bis] and the
   second minor version, NFSv4.1, is described in [RFC5661].  It follows
   the guidelines for minor versioning that are listed in Section 11 of
   [I-D.ietf-nfsv4-rfc3530bis].

   As a minor version, NFSv4.2 is consistent with the overall goals for
   NFSv4, but extends the protocol so as to better meet those goals,
   based on experiences with NFSv4.1.  In addition, NFSv4.2 has adopted
   some additional goals, which motivate some of the major extensions in
   NFSv4.2.

1.2.  Scope of This Document

   This document describes the NFSv4.2 protocol.  With respect to
   NFSv4.0 and NFSv4.1, this document does not:

   o  describe the NFSv4.0 or NFSv4.1 protocols, except where needed to
      contrast with NFSv4.2

   o  modify the specification of the NFSv4.0 or NFSv4.1 protocols

   o  clarify the NFSv4.0 or NFSv4.1 protocols.  I.e., any
      clarifications made here apply to NFSv4.2 and neither of the prior
      protocols

   The full XDR for NFSv4.2 is presented in [NFSv42xdr].

1.3.  NFSv4.2 Goals

   The goal of the design of NFSv4.2 is to take common local file system
   features and offer them remotely.  These features might

   o  already be available on the servers, e.g., sparse files

   o  be under development as a new standard, e.g., SEEK_HOLE and
      SEEK_DATA

   o  be used by clients with the servers via some proprietary means,
      e.g., Labeled NFS

   but the clients are not able to leverage them on the server within
   the confines of the NFS protocol.



Haynes                   Expires August 7, 2014                 [Page 5]

Internet-Draft                   NFSv4.2                   February 2014


1.4.  Overview of NFSv4.2 Features

1.4.1.  Server-side Copy

   A traditional file copy from one server to another results in the
   data being put on the network twice - source to client and then
   client to destination.  New operations are introduced to allow the
   client to authorize the two servers to interact directly.  As this
   copy can be lengthy, asynchronous support is also provided.

1.4.2.  Application I/O Advise

   Applications and clients want to advise the server as to expected I/O
   behavior.  Using IO_ADVISE (see Section 14.8) to communicate future
   I/O behavior such as whether a file will be accessed sequentially or
   randomly, and whether a file will or will not be accessed in the near
   future, allows servers to optimize future I/O requests for a file by,
   for example, prefetching or evicting data.  This operation can be
   used to support the posix_fadvise function as well as other
   applications such as databases and video editors.

1.4.3.  Sparse Files

   Sparse files are ones which have unallocated data blocks as holes in
   the file.  Such holes are typically transferred as 0s during I/O.
   READ_PLUS (see Section 14.10) allows a server to send back to the
   client metadata describing the hole and WRITE_PLUS (see Section 14.7)
   allows the client to punch holes into a file.  In addition, SEEK (see
   Section 14.11) is provided to scan for the next hole or data from a
   given location.

1.4.4.  Space Reservation

   When a file is sparse, one concern applications have is ensuring that
   there will always be enough data blocks available for the file during
   future writes.  A new attribute, space_reserved (see Section 12.2.4)
   provides the client a guarantee that space will be available.

1.4.5.  Application Data Hole (ADH) Support

   Some applications treat a file as if it were a disk and as such want
   to initialize (or format) the file image.  We extend both READ_PLUS
   and WRITE_PLUS to understand this metadata as a new form of a hole.

1.4.6.  Labeled NFS

   While both clients and servers can employ Mandatory Access Control
   (MAC) security models to enforce data access, there has been no



Haynes                   Expires August 7, 2014                 [Page 6]

Internet-Draft                   NFSv4.2                   February 2014


   protocol support to allow full interoperability.  A new file object
   attribute, sec_label (see Section 12.2.2) allows for the server to
   store and enforce MAC labels.  The format of the sec_label
   accommodates any MAC security system.

1.5.  Differences from NFSv4.1

   In NFSv4.1, the only way to introduce new variants of an operation
   was to introduce a new operation.  I.e., READ becomes either READ2 or
   READ_PLUS.  With the use of discriminated unions as parameters to
   such functions in NFSv4.2, it is possible to add a new arm in a
   subsequent minor version.  And it is also possible to move such an
   operation from OPTIONAL/RECOMMENDED to REQUIRED.  Forcing an
   implementation to adopt each arm of a discriminated union at such a
   time does not meet the spirit of the minor versioning rules.  As
   such, new arms of a discriminated union MUST follow the same
   guidelines for minor versioning as operations in NFSv4.1 - i.e., they
   may not be made REQUIRED.  To support this, a new error code,
   NFS4ERR_UNION_NOTSUPP, is introduced which allows the server to
   communicate to the client that the operation is supported, but the
   specific arm of the discriminated union is not.


2.  Minor Versioning

   To address the requirement of an NFS protocol that can evolve as the
   need arises, the NFSv4 protocol contains the rules and framework to
   allow for future minor changes or versioning.

   The base assumption with respect to minor versioning is that any
   future accepted minor version will be documented in one or more
   Standards Track RFCs.  Minor version 0 of the NFSv4 protocol is
   represented by [I-D.ietf-nfsv4-rfc3530bis], minor version 1 by
   [RFC5661], and minor version 2 by this document.  The COMPOUND and
   CB_COMPOUND procedures support the encoding of the minor version
   being requested by the client.

   The following items represent the basic rules for the development of
   minor versions.  Note that a future minor version may modify or add
   to the following rules as part of the minor version definition.

   1.   Procedures are not added or deleted.

        To maintain the general RPC model, NFSv4 minor versions will not
        add to or delete procedures from the NFS program.

   2.   Minor versions may add operations to the COMPOUND and
        CB_COMPOUND procedures.



Haynes                   Expires August 7, 2014                 [Page 7]

Internet-Draft                   NFSv4.2                   February 2014


        The addition of operations to the COMPOUND and CB_COMPOUND
        procedures does not affect the RPC model.


        *  Minor versions may append attributes to the bitmap4 that
           represents sets of attributes and to the fattr4 that
           represents sets of attribute values.

           This allows for the expansion of the attribute model to allow
           for future growth or adaptation.

        *  Minor version X must append any new attributes after the last
           documented attribute.

           Since attribute results are specified as an opaque array of
           per-attribute, XDR-encoded results, the complexity of adding
           new attributes in the midst of the current definitions would
           be too burdensome.

   3.   Minor versions must not modify the structure of an existing
        operation's arguments or results.

        Again, the complexity of handling multiple structure definitions
        for a single operation is too burdensome.  New operations should
        be added instead of modifying existing structures for a minor
        version.

        This rule does not preclude the following adaptations in a minor
        version:


        *  adding bits to flag fields, such as new attributes to
           GETATTR's bitmap4 data type, and providing corresponding
           variants of opaque arrays, such as a notify4 used together
           with such bitmaps

        *  adding bits to existing attributes like ACLs that have flag
           words

        *  extending enumerated types (including NFS4ERR_*) with new
           values

        *  adding cases to a switched union

   4.   Note that when adding new cases to a switched union, a minor
        version must not make new cases be REQUIRED.  While the
        encapsulating operation may be REQUIRED, the new cases (the
        specific arm of the discriminated union) is not.  The error code



Haynes                   Expires August 7, 2014                 [Page 8]

Internet-Draft                   NFSv4.2                   February 2014


        NFS4ERR_UNION_NOTSUPP is used to notify the client when the
        server does not support such a case.

   5.   Minor versions must not modify the structure of existing
        attributes.

   6.   Minor versions must not delete operations.

        This prevents the potential reuse of a particular operation
        "slot" in a future minor version.

   7.   Minor versions must not delete attributes.

   8.   Minor versions must not delete flag bits or enumeration values.

   9.   Minor versions may declare an operation MUST NOT be implemented.

        Specifying that an operation MUST NOT be implemented is
        equivalent to obsoleting an operation.  For the client, it means
        that the operation MUST NOT be sent to the server.  For the
        server, an NFS error can be returned as opposed to "dropping"
        the request as an XDR decode error.  This approach allows for
        the obsolescence of an operation while maintaining its structure
        so that a future minor version can reintroduce the operation.


        1.  Minor versions may declare that an attribute MUST NOT be
            implemented.

        2.  Minor versions may declare that a flag bit or enumeration
            value MUST NOT be implemented.

   10.  Minor versions may declare an operation to be OBSOLESCENT, which
        indicates an intention to remove the operation (i.e., make it
        MANDATORY TO NOT implement) in a subsequent minor version.  Such
        labeling is separate from the question of whether the operation
        is REQUIRED or RECOMMENDED or OPTIONAL in the current minor
        version.  An operation may be both REQUIRED for the given minor
        version and marked OBSOLESCENT, with the expectation that it
        will be MANDATORY TO NOT implement in the next (or other
        subsequent) minor version.

   11.  Note that the early notification of operation obsolescence is
        put in place to mitigate the effects of design and
        implementation mistakes, and to allow protocol development to
        adapt to unexpected changes in the pace of implementation.  Even
        if an operation is marked OBSOLESCENT in a given minor version,
        it may end up not being marked MANDATORY TO NOT implement in the



Haynes                   Expires August 7, 2014                 [Page 9]

Internet-Draft                   NFSv4.2                   February 2014


        next minor version.  In unusual circumstances, it might not be
        marked OBSOLESCENT in a subsequent minor version, and never
        become MANDATORY TO NOT implement.

   12.  Minor versions may downgrade features from REQUIRED to
        RECOMMENDED, from RECOMMENDED to OPTIONAL, or from OPTIONAL to
        MANDATORY TO NOT implement.  Also, if a feature was marked as
        OBSOLESCENT in the prior minor version, it may be downgraded
        from REQUIRED to OPTIONAL from RECOMMENDED to MANDATORY TO NOT
        implement, or from REQUIRED to MANDATORY TO NOT implement.

   13.  Minor versions may upgrade features from OPTIONAL to
        RECOMMENDED, or RECOMMENDED to REQUIRED.  Also, if a feature was
        marked as OBSOLESCENT in the prior minor version, it may be
        upgraded to not be OBSOLESCENT.

   14.  A client and server that support minor version X SHOULD support
        minor versions 0 through X-1 as well.

   15.  Except for infrastructural changes, a minor version must not
        introduce REQUIRED new features.

        This rule allows for the introduction of new functionality and
        forces the use of implementation experience before designating a
        feature as REQUIRED.  On the other hand, some classes of
        features are infrastructural and have broad effects.  Allowing
        infrastructural features to be RECOMMENDED or OPTIONAL
        complicates implementation of the minor version.

   16.  A client MUST NOT attempt to use a stateid, filehandle, or
        similar returned object from the COMPOUND procedure with minor
        version X for another COMPOUND procedure with minor version Y,
        where X != Y.


3.  Server-side Copy

3.1.  Introduction

   The server-side copy feature provides a mechanism for the NFS client
   to perform a file copy on a server or between two servers without the
   data being transmitted back and forth over the network through the
   NFS client.  Without this feature, an NFS client copies data from one
   location to another by reading the data from the source server over
   the network, and then writing the data back over the network to the
   destiniation server.

   If the source object and destination object are on different file



Haynes                   Expires August 7, 2014                [Page 10]

Internet-Draft                   NFSv4.2                   February 2014


   servers, the file servers will communicate with one another to
   perform the copy operation.  The server-to-server protocol by which
   this is accomplished is not defined in this document.

3.2.  Protocol Overview

   The server-side copy offload operations support both intra-server and
   inter-server file copies.  An intra-server copy is a copy in which
   the source file and destination file reside on the same server.  In
   an inter-server copy, the source file and destination file are on
   different servers.  In both cases, the copy may be performed
   synchronously or asynchronously.

   Throughout the rest of this document, we refer to the NFS server
   containing the source file as the "source server" and the NFS server
   to which the file is transferred as the "destination server".  In the
   case of an intra-server copy, the source server and destination
   server are the same server.  Therefore in the context of an intra-
   server copy, the terms source server and destination server refer to
   the single server performing the copy.

   The operations described below are designed to copy files.  Other
   file system objects can be copied by building on these operations or
   using other techniques.  For example if the user wishes to copy a
   directory, the client can synthesize a directory copy by first
   creating the destination directory and then copying the source
   directory's files to the new destination directory.  If the user
   wishes to copy a namespace junction [FEDFS-NSDB] [FEDFS-ADMIN], the
   client can use the ONC RPC Federated Filesystem protocol
   [FEDFS-ADMIN] to perform the copy.  Specifically the client can
   determine the source junction's attributes using the FEDFS_LOOKUP_FSN
   procedure and create a duplicate junction using the
   FEDFS_CREATE_JUNCTION procedure.

   For the inter-server copy, the operations are defined to be
   compatible with the traditional copy authentication approach.  The
   client and user are authorized at the source for reading.  Then they
   are authorized at the destination for writing.

3.2.1.  Overview of Copy Operations

   COPY_NOTIFY:  For inter-server copies, the client sends this
      operation to the source server to notify it of a future file copy
      from a given destination server for the given user.
      (Section 14.3)






Haynes                   Expires August 7, 2014                [Page 11]

Internet-Draft                   NFSv4.2                   February 2014


   OFFLOAD_REVOKE:  Also for inter-server copies, the client sends this
      operation to the source server to revoke permission to copy a file
      for the given user.  (Section 14.4)

   COPY:  Used by the client to request a file copy.  (Section 14.1)

   OFFLOAD_ABORT:  Used by the client to abort an asynchronous file
      copy.  (Section 14.2)

   OFFLOAD_STATUS:  Used by the client to poll the status of an
      asynchronous file copy.  (Section 14.5)

   CB_OFFLOAD:  Used by the destination server to report the results of
      an asynchronous file copy to the client.  (Section 15.1)

3.2.2.  Locking the Files

   Both the source and destination file may need to be locked to protect
   the content during the copy operations.  A client can achieve this by
   a combination of OPEN and LOCK operations.  I.e., either share or
   byte range locks might be desired.

3.2.3.  Intra-Server Copy

   To copy a file on a single server, the client uses a COPY operation.
   The server may respond to the copy operation with the final results
   of the copy or it may perform the copy asynchronously and deliver the
   results using a CB_OFFLOAD operation callback.  If the copy is
   performed asynchronously, the client may poll the status of the copy
   using OFFLOAD_STATUS or cancel the copy using OFFLOAD_ABORT.

   A synchronous intra-server copy is shown in Figure 1.  In this
   example, the NFS server chooses to perform the copy synchronously.
   The copy operation is completed, either successfully or
   unsuccessfully, before the server replies to the client's request.
   The server's reply contains the final result of the operation.















Haynes                   Expires August 7, 2014                [Page 12]

Internet-Draft                   NFSv4.2                   February 2014


     Client                                  Server
        +                                      +
        |                                      |
        |--- OPEN ---------------------------->| Client opens
        |<------------------------------------/| the source file
        |                                      |
        |--- OPEN ---------------------------->| Client opens
        |<------------------------------------/| the destination file
        |                                      |
        |--- COPY ---------------------------->| Client requests
        |<------------------------------------/| a file copy
        |                                      |
        |--- CLOSE --------------------------->| Client closes
        |<------------------------------------/| the destination file
        |                                      |
        |--- CLOSE --------------------------->| Client closes
        |<------------------------------------/| the source file
        |                                      |
        |                                      |

                Figure 1: A synchronous intra-server copy.

   An asynchronous intra-server copy is shown in Figure 2.  In this
   example, the NFS server performs the copy asynchronously.  The
   server's reply to the copy request indicates that the copy operation
   was initiated and the final result will be delivered at a later time.
   The server's reply also contains a copy stateid.  The client may use
   this copy stateid to poll for status information (as shown) or to
   cancel the copy using a OFFLOAD_ABORT.  When the server completes the
   copy, the server performs a callback to the client and reports the
   results.




















Haynes                   Expires August 7, 2014                [Page 13]

Internet-Draft                   NFSv4.2                   February 2014


     Client                                  Server
        +                                      +
        |                                      |
        |--- OPEN ---------------------------->| Client opens
        |<------------------------------------/| the source file
        |                                      |
        |--- OPEN ---------------------------->| Client opens
        |<------------------------------------/| the destination file
        |                                      |
        |--- COPY ---------------------------->| Client requests
        |<------------------------------------/| a file copy
        |                                      |
        |                                      |
        |--- OFFLOAD_STATUS ------------------>| Client may poll
        |<------------------------------------/| for status
        |                                      |
        |                  .                   | Multiple OFFLOAD_STATUS
        |                  .                   | operations may be sent.
        |                  .                   |
        |                                      |
        |<-- CB_OFFLOAD -----------------------| Server reports results
        |\------------------------------------>|
        |                                      |
        |--- CLOSE --------------------------->| Client closes
        |<------------------------------------/| the destination file
        |                                      |
        |--- CLOSE --------------------------->| Client closes
        |<------------------------------------/| the source file
        |                                      |
        |                                      |

               Figure 2: An asynchronous intra-server copy.

3.2.4.  Inter-Server Copy

   A copy may also be performed between two servers.  The copy protocol
   is designed to accommodate a variety of network topologies.  As shown
   in Figure 3, the client and servers may be connected by multiple
   networks.  In particular, the servers may be connected by a
   specialized, high speed network (network 192.0.2.0/24 in the diagram)
   that does not include the client.  The protocol allows the client to
   setup the copy between the servers (over network 203.0.113.0/24 in
   the diagram) and for the servers to communicate on the high speed
   network if they choose to do so.







Haynes                   Expires August 7, 2014                [Page 14]

Internet-Draft                   NFSv4.2                   February 2014


                             192.0.2.0/24
                 +-------------------------------------+
                 |                                     |
                 |                                     |
                 | 192.0.2.18                          | 192.0.2.56
         +-------+------+                       +------+------+
         |     Source   |                       | Destination |
         +-------+------+                       +------+------+
                 | 203.0.113.18                        | 203.0.113.56
                 |                                     |
                 |                                     |
                 |             203.0.113.0/24          |
                 +------------------+------------------+
                                    |
                                    |
                                    | 203.0.113.243
                              +-----+-----+
                              |   Client  |
                              +-----------+

            Figure 3: An example inter-server network topology.

   For an inter-server copy, the client notifies the source server that
   a file will be copied by the destination server using a COPY_NOTIFY
   operation.  The client then initiates the copy by sending the COPY
   operation to the destination server.  The destination server may
   perform the copy synchronously or asynchronously.

   A synchronous inter-server copy is shown in Figure 4.  In this case,
   the destination server chooses to perform the copy before responding
   to the client's COPY request.

   An asynchronous copy is shown in Figure 5.  In this case, the
   destination server chooses to respond to the client's COPY request
   immediately and then perform the copy asynchronously.
















Haynes                   Expires August 7, 2014                [Page 15]

Internet-Draft                   NFSv4.2                   February 2014


     Client                Source         Destination
        +                    +                 +
        |                    |                 |
        |--- OPEN        --->|                 | Returns os1
        |<------------------/|                 |
        |                    |                 |
        |--- COPY_NOTIFY --->|                 |
        |<------------------/|                 |
        |                    |                 |
        |--- OPEN ---------------------------->| Returns os2
        |<------------------------------------/|
        |                    |                 |
        |--- COPY ---------------------------->|
        |                    |                 |
        |                    |                 |
        |                    |<----- read -----|
        |                    |\--------------->|
        |                    |                 |
        |                    |        .        | Multiple reads may
        |                    |        .        | be necessary
        |                    |        .        |
        |                    |                 |
        |                    |                 |
        |<------------------------------------/| Destination replies
        |                    |                 | to COPY
        |                    |                 |
        |--- CLOSE --------------------------->| Release open state
        |<------------------------------------/|
        |                    |                 |
        |--- CLOSE       --->|                 | Release open state
        |<------------------/|                 |

                Figure 4: A synchronous inter-server copy.


     Client                Source         Destination
       +                    +                 +
       |                    |                 |
       |--- OPEN        --->|                 | Returns os1
       |<------------------/|                 |
       |                    |                 |
       |--- LOCK        --->|                 | Optional, could be done
       |<------------------/|                 | with a share lock
       |                    |                 |
       |--- COPY_NOTIFY --->|                 | Need to pass in
       |<------------------/|                 | os1 or lock state
       |                    |                 |
       |                    |                 |



Haynes                   Expires August 7, 2014                [Page 16]

Internet-Draft                   NFSv4.2                   February 2014


       |                    |                 |
       |--- OPEN ---------------------------->| Returns os2
       |<------------------------------------/|
       |                    |                 |
       |--- LOCK ---------------------------->| Optional ...
       |<------------------------------------/|
       |                    |                 |
       |--- COPY ---------------------------->| Need to pass in
       |<------------------------------------/| os2 or lock state
       |                    |                 |
       |                    |                 |
       |                    |<----- read -----|
       |                    |\--------------->|
       |                    |                 |
       |                    |        .        | Multiple reads may
       |                    |        .        | be necessary
       |                    |        .        |
       |                    |                 |
       |                    |                 |
       |--- OFFLOAD_STATUS ------------------>| Client may poll
       |<------------------------------------/| for status
       |                    |                 |
       |                    |        .        | Multiple OFFLOAD_STATUS
       |                    |        .        | operations may be sent
       |                    |        .        |
       |                    |                 |
       |                    |                 |
       |                    |                 |
       |<-- CB_OFFLOAD -----------------------| Destination reports
       |\------------------------------------>| results
       |                    |                 |
       |--- LOCKU --------------------------->| Only if LOCK was done
       |<------------------------------------/|
       |                    |                 |
       |--- CLOSE --------------------------->| Release open state
       |<------------------------------------/|
       |                    |                 |
       |--- LOCKU       --->|                 | Only if LOCK was done
       |<------------------/|                 |
       |                    |                 |
       |--- CLOSE       --->|                 | Release open state
       |<------------------/|                 |
       |                    |                 |

               Figure 5: An asynchronous inter-server copy.






Haynes                   Expires August 7, 2014                [Page 17]

Internet-Draft                   NFSv4.2                   February 2014


3.2.5.  Server-to-Server Copy Protocol

   The source server and destination server are not required to use a
   specific protocol to transfer the file data.  The choice of what
   protocol to use is ultimately the destination server's decision.

3.2.5.1.  Using NFSv4.x as a Server-to-Server Copy Protocol

   The destination server MAY use standard NFSv4.x (where x >= 1)
   operations to read the data from the source server.  If NFSv4.x is
   used for the server-to-server copy protocol, the destination server
   can use the source filehandle and ca_src_stateid provided in the COPY
   request with standard NFSv4.x operations to read data from the source
   server.

3.2.5.2.  Using an alternative Server-to-Server Copy Protocol

   In a homogeneous environment, the source and destination servers
   might be able to perform the file copy extremely efficiently using
   specialized protocols.  For example the source and destination
   servers might be two nodes sharing a common file system format for
   the source and destination file systems.  Thus the source and
   destination are in an ideal position to efficiently render the image
   of the source file to the destination file by replicating the file
   system formats at the block level.  Another possibility is that the
   source and destination might be two nodes sharing a common storage
   area network, and thus there is no need to copy any data at all, and
   instead ownership of the file and its contents might simply be re-
   assigned to the destination.  To allow for these possibilities, the
   destination server is allowed to use a server-to-server copy protocol
   of its choice.

   In a heterogeneous environment, using a protocol other than NFSv4.x
   (e.g., HTTP [RFC2616] or FTP [RFC0959]) presents some challenges.  In
   particular, the destination server is presented with the challenge of
   accessing the source file given only an NFSv4.x filehandle.

   One option for protocols that identify source files with path names
   is to use an ASCII hexadecimal representation of the source
   filehandle as the file name.

   Another option for the source server is to use URLs to direct the
   destination server to a specialized service.  For example, the
   response to COPY_NOTIFY could include the URL
   ftp://s1.example.com:9999/_FH/0x12345, where 0x12345 is the ASCII
   hexadecimal representation of the source filehandle.  When the
   destination server receives the source server's URL, it would use
   "_FH/0x12345" as the file name to pass to the FTP server listening on



Haynes                   Expires August 7, 2014                [Page 18]

Internet-Draft                   NFSv4.2                   February 2014


   port 9999 of s1.example.com.  On port 9999 there would be a special
   instance of the FTP service that understands how to convert NFS
   filehandles to an open file descriptor (in many operating systems,
   this would require a new system call, one which is the inverse of the
   makefh() function that the pre-NFSv4 MOUNT service needs).

   Authenticating and identifying the destination server to the source
   server is also a challenge.  Recommendations for how to accomplish
   this are given in Section 3.4.1.4.

3.3.  Requirements for Operations

   The implementation of server-side copy is OPTIONAL by the client and
   the server.  However, in order to successfully copy a file, some
   operations MUST be supported by the client and/or server.

   If a client desires an intra-server file copy, then it MUST support
   the COPY and CB_OFFLOAD operations.  If COPY returns a stateid, then
   the client MAY use the OFFLOAD_ABORT and OFFLOAD_STATUS operations.

   If a client desires an inter-server file copy, then it MUST support
   the COPY, COPY_NOTICE, and CB_OFFLOAD operations, and MAY use the
   OFFLOAD_REVOKE operation.  If COPY returns a stateid, then the client
   MAY use the OFFLOAD_ABORT and OFFLOAD_STATUS operations.

   If a server supports intra-server copy, then the server MUST support
   the COPY operation.  If a server's COPY operation returns a stateid,
   then the server MUST also support these operations: CB_OFFLOAD,
   OFFLOAD_ABORT, and OFFLOAD_STATUS.

   If a source server supports inter-server copy, then the source server
   MUST support all these operations: COPY_NOTIFY and OFFLOAD_REVOKE.
   If a destination server supports inter-server copy, then the
   destination server MUST support the COPY operation.  If a destination
   server's COPY operation returns a stateid, then the destination
   server MUST also support these operations: CB_OFFLOAD, OFFLOAD_ABORT,
   COPY_NOTIFY, OFFLOAD_REVOKE, and OFFLOAD_STATUS.

   Each operation is performed in the context of the user identified by
   the ONC RPC credential of its containing COMPOUND or CB_COMPOUND
   request.  For example, a OFFLOAD_ABORT operation issued by a given
   user indicates that a specified COPY operation initiated by the same
   user be canceled.  Therefore a OFFLOAD_ABORT MUST NOT interfere with
   a copy of the same file initiated by another user.

   An NFS server MAY allow an administrative user to monitor or cancel
   copy operations using an implementation specific interface.




Haynes                   Expires August 7, 2014                [Page 19]

Internet-Draft                   NFSv4.2                   February 2014


3.3.1.  netloc4 - Network Locations

   The server-side copy operations specify network locations using the
   netloc4 data type shown below:

   enum netloc_type4 {
           NL4_NAME        = 0,
           NL4_URL         = 1,
           NL4_NETADDR     = 2
   };
   union netloc4 switch (netloc_type4 nl_type) {
           case NL4_NAME:          utf8str_cis nl_name;
           case NL4_URL:           utf8str_cis nl_url;
           case NL4_NETADDR:       netaddr4    nl_addr;
   };

   If the netloc4 is of type NL4_NAME, the nl_name field MUST be
   specified as a UTF-8 string.  The nl_name is expected to be resolved
   to a network address via DNS, LDAP, NIS, /etc/hosts, or some other
   means.  If the netloc4 is of type NL4_URL, a server URL [RFC3986]
   appropriate for the server-to-server copy operation is specified as a
   UTF-8 string.  If the netloc4 is of type NL4_NETADDR, the nl_addr
   field MUST contain a valid netaddr4 as defined in Section 3.3.9 of
   [RFC5661].

   When netloc4 values are used for an inter-server copy as shown in
   Figure 3, their values may be evaluated on the source server,
   destination server, and client.  The network environment in which
   these systems operate should be configured so that the netloc4 values
   are interpreted as intended on each system.

3.3.2.  Copy Offload Stateids

   A server may perform a copy offload operation asynchronously.  An
   asynchronous copy is tracked using a copy offload stateid.  Copy
   offload stateids are included in the COPY, OFFLOAD_ABORT,
   OFFLOAD_STATUS, and CB_OFFLOAD operations.

   Section 8.2.4 of [RFC5661] specifies that stateids are valid until
   either (A) the client or server restart or (B) the client returns the
   resource.

   A copy offload stateid will be valid until either (A) the client or
   server restarts or (B) the client returns the resource by issuing a
   OFFLOAD_ABORT operation or the client replies to a CB_OFFLOAD
   operation.

   A copy offload stateid's seqid MUST NOT be 0.  In the context of a



Haynes                   Expires August 7, 2014                [Page 20]

Internet-Draft                   NFSv4.2                   February 2014


   copy offload operation, it is ambiguous to indicate the most recent
   copy offload operation using a stateid with seqid of 0.  Therefore a
   copy offload stateid with seqid of 0 MUST be considered invalid.

3.4.  Security Considerations

   The security considerations pertaining to NFSv4
   [I-D.ietf-nfsv4-rfc3530bis] apply to this chapter.

   The standard security mechanisms provide by NFSv4
   [I-D.ietf-nfsv4-rfc3530bis] may be used to secure the protocol
   described in this chapter.

   NFSv4 clients and servers supporting the inter-server copy operations
   described in this chapter are REQUIRED to implement the mechanism
   described in Section 3.4.1.2, and to support rejecting COPY_NOTIFY
   requests that do not use RPCSEC_GSS with privacy.  If the server-to-
   server copy protocol is ONC RPC based, the servers are also REQUIRED
   to implement [rpcsec_gssv3] including the RPCSEC_GSSv3 copy_to_auth,
   copy_from_auth, and copy_confirm_auth structured privileges.  This
   requirement to implement is not a requirement to use; for example, a
   server may depending on configuration also allow COPY_NOTIFY requests
   that use only AUTH_SYS.

3.4.1.  Inter-Server Copy Security

3.4.1.1.  Requirements for Secure Inter-Server Copy

   Inter-server copy is driven by several requirements:

   o  The specification must not mandate an inter-server copy protocol.
      There are many ways to copy data.  Some will be more optimal than
      others depending on the identities of the source server and
      destination server.  For example the source and destination
      servers might be two nodes sharing a common file system format for
      the source and destination file systems.  Thus the source and
      destination are in an ideal position to efficiently render the
      image of the source file to the destination file by replicating
      the file system formats at the block level.  In other cases, the
      source and destination might be two nodes sharing a common storage
      area network, and thus there is no need to copy any data at all,
      and instead ownership of the file and its contents simply gets re-
      assigned to the destination.

   o  The specification must provide guidance for using NFSv4.x as a
      copy protocol.  For those source and destination servers willing
      to use NFSv4.x there are specific security considerations that
      this specification can and does address.



Haynes                   Expires August 7, 2014                [Page 21]

Internet-Draft                   NFSv4.2                   February 2014


   o  The specification must not mandate pre-configuration between the
      source and destination server.  Requiring that the source and
      destination first have a "copying relationship" increases the
      administrative burden.  However the specification MUST NOT
      preclude implementations that require pre-configuration.

   o  The specification must not mandate a trust relationship between
      the source and destination server.  The NFSv4 security model
      requires mutual authentication between a principal on an NFS
      client and a principal on an NFS server.  This model MUST continue
      with the introduction of COPY.

3.4.1.2.  Inter-Server Copy via ONC RPC with RPCSEC_GSSv3

   When the client sends a COPY_NOTIFY to the source server to expect
   the destination to attempt to copy data from the source server, it is
   expected that this copy is being done on behalf of the principal
   (called the "user principal") that sent the RPC request that encloses
   the COMPOUND procedure that contains the COPY_NOTIFY operation.  The
   user principal is identified by the RPC credentials.  A mechanism
   that allows the user principal to authorize the destination server to
   perform the copy, that lets the source server properly authenticate
   the destination's copy, and does not allow the destination server to
   exceed this authorization, is necessary.

   An approach that sends delegated credentials of the client's user
   principal to the destination server is not used for the following
   reason.  If the client's user delegated its credentials, the
   destination would authenticate as the user principal.  If the
   destination were using the NFSv4 protocol to perform the copy, then
   the source server would authenticate the destination server as the
   user principal, and the file copy would securely proceed.  However,
   this approach would allow the destination server to copy other files.
   The user principal would have to trust the destination server to not
   do so.  This is counter to the requirements, and therefore is not
   considered.

   Instead, we employ a combination of two features of the RPCSEC_GSSv3
   [rpcsec_gssv3] protocol: compound authentication and RPC application
   defined structured privilege assertions.  The combination of these
   features allows the destination server to authenticate to the source
   server as acting on behalf of the user prinicpal, and to authorize
   the destination server to perform READs of the file to be copied from
   the source on behalf of the user principal.  Once the copy is
   complete, the client can destroy the RPCSEC_GSSv3 handles to end the
   source and destination servers authorization to copy.

   RPCSEC_GSSv3 introduces the notion of RPC application defined



Haynes                   Expires August 7, 2014                [Page 22]

Internet-Draft                   NFSv4.2                   February 2014


   structured privileges.  We define three structured privileges that
   work in tandum to authorize the copy:

   copy_from_auth:  A user principal is authorizing a source principal
      ("nfs@<source>") to allow a destination principal ("nfs@
      <destination>") to setup the copy_confirm_auth privilege required
      to copy a file from the source to the destination on behalf of the
      user principal.  This privilege is established on the source
      server before the user principal sends a COPY_NOTIFY operation to
      the source server, and the resultant RPCSEC_GSSv3 context is used
      to secure the COPY_NOTIFY operation.


   struct copy_from_auth_priv {
           secret4             cfap_shared_secret;
           netloc4             cfap_destination;
           /* the NFSv4 user name that the user principal maps to */
           utf8str_mixed       cfap_username;
   };


      cfp_shared_secret is an automatically generated random number
      secret value.

   copy_to_auth:  A user principal is authorizing a destination
      principal ("nfs@<destination>") to setup a copy_confirm_auth
      privilege with a source principal ("nfs@<source>") to allow it to
      copy a file from the source to the destination on behalf of the
      user principal.  This privilege is established on the destination
      server before the user principal sends a COPY operation to the
      destination server, and the resultant RPCSEC_GSSv3 context is used
      to secure the COPY operation.



















Haynes                   Expires August 7, 2014                [Page 23]

Internet-Draft                   NFSv4.2                   February 2014


   struct copy_to_auth_priv {
           /* equal to cfap_shared_secret */
           secret4              ctap_shared_secret;
           netloc4              ctap_source;
           /* the NFSv4 user name that the user principal maps to */
           utf8str_mixed        ctap_username;
           /*
            * user principal RPCSEC_GSSv1 (or v2) handle shared
            * with the source server
            */
           opaque               ctap_handle;
           int                  ctap_handle_vers;
           /* A nounce and a mic of the nounce using ctap_handle */
           opaque               ctap_nounce;
           opaque               ctap_nounce_mic;
   };


      ctap_shared_secret is the automatically generated secret value
      used to establish the copy_from_auth privilege with the source
      principal. ctap_handle, ctap_handle_vers, ctap_nounce and
      ctap_nounce_mic are used to construct the compound authentication
      portion of the copy_confirm_auth RPCGSS_GSSv3 context between the
      destination server and the source server.  See Section 3.4.1.2.1

   copy_confirm_auth:  A destination principal ("nfs@<destination>") is
      confirming with the source principal ("nfs@<source>") that it is
      authorized to copy data from the source.  Note that besides the
      rpc_gss3_privs payload (struct copy_confirm_auth_priv), the
      copy_confirm_auth RPCSEC_GSS3_CREATE message also contains an
      rpc_gss3_gss_binding payload so that the copy is done on behalf of
      the user principal.  This privilege is established on the
      destination server before the file is copied from the source to
      the destination.  The resultant RPCSEC_GSSv3 context is used to
      secure the READ operations from the source to the destination
      server.


   struct copy_confirm_auth_priv {
           /* equal to GSS_GetMIC() of cfap_shared_secret */
           opaque              ccap_shared_secret_mic<>;
           /* the NFSv4 user name that the user principal maps to */
           utf8str_mixed       ccap_username;
   };







Haynes                   Expires August 7, 2014                [Page 24]

Internet-Draft                   NFSv4.2                   February 2014


3.4.1.2.1.  Establishing a Security Context

   The RPCSEC_GSSv3 compound authentication feature allows a server to
   act on behalf of a user if the server identifies the user and trusts
   the client.  In the inter-server server side copy case, the server is
   the source server, and the client is the destination server acting as
   a client when performing the copy.

   The user principal is not required (nor expected) to have an
   RPCSEC_GSS secured connection and context between the destination
   server (acting as a client) and the source server.  The user
   principal does have an RPCSEC_GSS secured connection and context
   between the client and the source server established for the OPEN of
   the file to be copied.

   We use the RPCSEC_GSS context established between the user principal
   and the source server to OPEN the file to be copied to provide the
   the necessary user principal identification to the source server from
   the destination server (acting as a client).  This is accomplished by
   sending the user principal indentification information: e.g the
   rpc_gss3_gss_binding fields, in the copy_to_auth privilege
   established between the client and the destination server.  This same
   information is then placed in the rpc_gss3_gss_binding fields of the
   copy_confirm_auth RPCSEC_GSS3_CREATE message sent from the
   destination server (acting as a client) to the source server.

   When the user principal wants to COPY a file between two servers, if
   it has not established copy_from_auth and copy_to_auth privileges on
   the servers, it establishes them:

   o  As noted in [rpcsec_gssv3] the client uses an existing
      RPCSEC_GSSv1 (or v2) context termed the "parent" handle to
      establish and protect RPCSEC_GSSv3 exchanges.  The copy_from_auth
      privilege will use the context established between the user
      principal and the source server used to OPEN the source file as
      the RPCSEC_GSSv3 parent handle.  The copy_to_auth privilege will
      use the context established between the user principal and the
      destination server used to OPEN the destination file as the
      RPCSEC_GSSv3 parent handle.

   o  A random number is generated to use as a secret to be shared
      between the two servers.  This shared secret will be placed in the
      cfap_shared_secret and ctap_shared_secret fields of the
      appropriate privilege data types, copy_from_auth_priv and
      copy_to_auth_priv.  Because of this shared_secret the
      RPCSEC_GSS3_CREATE control messages for copy_from_auth and
      copy_to_auth MUST use a QOP of rpc_gss_svc_privacy.




Haynes                   Expires August 7, 2014                [Page 25]

Internet-Draft                   NFSv4.2                   February 2014


   o  An instance of copy_from_auth_priv is filled in with the shared
      secret, the destination server, and the NFSv4 user id of the user
      principal and is placed in rpc_gss3_create_args
      assertions[0].assertion.privs.privilege.  The string
      "copy_from_auth" is placed in assertions[0].assertion.privs.name.
      The field assertions[0].critical is set to TRUE.  The source
      server unwraps the rpc_gss_svc_privacy RPCSEC_GSS3_CREATE payload
      and verifies that the NFSv4 user id being asserted matches the
      source server's mapping of the user principal.  If it does, the
      privilege is established on the source server as:
      <"copy_from_auth", user id, destination>.  The field "handle" in a
      successful reply is the RPCSEC_GSSv3 "child" handle that the
      client will use on COPY_NOTIFY requests to the source server
      involving the destination server.
      granted_assertions[0].assertion.privs.name will be equal to
      "copy_from_auth".

   o  An instance of copy_to_auth_priv is filled in with the shared
      secret, the cnr_source_server list returned by COPY_NOTIFY, and
      the NFSv4 user id of the user principal.  The next four fields are
      passed in the copy_to_auth privilege to be used by the
      copy_confirm_auth rpc_gss3_gss_binding fields as explained above.
      A nounce is created, and GSS_MIC() is invoked on the nounce using
      the RPCSEC_GSSv1 (or v2) context shared between user prinicpal and
      the source server.  The nounce, nounce MIC, context handle used to
      create the nounce MIC, and the context handle version are added to
      the copy_to_auth_priv instance which is placed in
      rpc_gss3_create_args assertions[0].assertion.privs.privilege.  The
      string "copy_to_auth" is placed in
      assertions[0].assertion.privs.name.  The field
      assertions[0].critical is set to TRUE.  The destination server
      unwraps the rpc_gss_svc_privacy RPCSEC_GSS3_CREATE payload and
      verifies that the NFSv4 user id being asserted matches the
      destination server's mapping of the user principal.  If it does,
      the privilege is established on the destination server as:
      <"copy_to_auth", user id, source list, nounce, nounce MIC, context
      handle, handle version>.  The field "handle" in a successful reply
      is the RPCSEC_GSSv3 "child" handle that the client will use on
      COPY requests to the destination server involving the source
      server. granted_assertions[0].assertion.privs.name will be equal
      to "copy_to_auth".

   As noted in [rpcsec_gssv3] section 2.3.1 "Create Request", both the
   client and the source server should associate the RPCSEC_GSSv3
   "child" handle with the parent RPCSEC_GSSv1 (or v2) handle used to
   create the RPCSEC_GSSv3 child handle.





Haynes                   Expires August 7, 2014                [Page 26]

Internet-Draft                   NFSv4.2                   February 2014


3.4.1.2.2.  Starting a Secure Inter-Server Copy

   When the client sends a COPY_NOTIFY request to the source server, it
   uses the privileged "copy_from_auth" RPCSEC_GSSv3 handle.
   cna_destination_server in COPY_NOTIFY MUST be the same as
   cfap_destination specified in copy_from_auth_priv.  Otherwise,
   COPY_NOTIFY will fail with NFS4ERR_ACCESS.  The source server
   verifies that the privilege <"copy_from_auth", user id, destination>
   exists, and annotates it with the source filehandle, if the user
   principal has read access to the source file, and if administrative
   policies give the user principal and the NFS client read access to
   the source file (i.e., if the ACCESS operation would grant read
   access).  Otherwise, COPY_NOTIFY will fail with NFS4ERR_ACCESS.

   When the client sends a COPY request to the destination server, it
   uses the privileged "copy_to_auth" RPCSEC_GSSv3 handle.
   ca_source_server list in COPY MUST be the same as ctap_source list
   specified in copy_to_auth_priv.  Otherwise, COPY will fail with
   NFS4ERR_ACCESS.  The destination server verifies that the privilege
   <"copy_to_auth", user id, source list, nounce, nounce MIC, context
   handle, handle version> exists, and annotates it with the source and
   destination filehandles.  If the COPY returns a wr_callback_id, then
   this is an asynchronous copy and the wr_callback_id must also must be
   annotated to the copy_to_auth privilege.  If the client has failed to
   establish the "copy_to_auth" privilege it will reject the request
   with NFS4ERR_PARTNER_NO_AUTH.

   If either the COPY_NOTIFY, or the COPY operations fail, the
   associated "copy_from_auth" and "copy_to_auth" RPCSEC_GSSv3 handles
   MUST be destroyed.

3.4.1.2.3.  Securing ONC RPC Server-to-Server Copy Protocols

   After a destination server has a "copy_to_auth" privilege established
   on it, and it receives a COPY request, if it knows it will use an ONC
   RPC protocol to copy data, it will establish a "copy_confirm_auth"
   privilege on the source server prior to responding to the COPY
   operation as follows:

   o  Before establishing an RPCSEC_GSSv3 context, a parent context
      needs to exist between nfs@<destination> as the initiator
      principal, and nfs@<source> as the target principal.  If NFS is to
      be used as the copy protocol, this means that the destiniation
      server must mount the source server using RPCSEC_GSS.

   o  An instance of copy_confirm_auth_priv is filled in with
      information from the established "copy_to_auth" privilege.  The
      value of the field ccap_shared_secret_mic is a GSS_GetMIC() of the



Haynes                   Expires August 7, 2014                [Page 27]

Internet-Draft                   NFSv4.2                   February 2014


      ctap_shared_secret in the copy_to_auth privilege using the parent
      handle context.  The field ccap_username is the mapping of the
      user principal to an NFSv4 user name ("user"@"domain" form), and
      MUST be the same as the ctap_username in the copy_to_auth
      privilege.  The copy_confirm_auth_priv instance is placed in
      rpc_gss3_create_args assertions[0].assertion.privs.privilege.  The
      string "copy_confirm_auth" is placed in
      assertions[0].assertion.privs.name.  The field
      assertions[0].critical is set to TRUE.

   o  The copy_confirm_auth RPCSEC_GSS3_CREATE call also includes a
      compound authentication component.  The rpc_gss3_gss_binding
      fields are filled in with information from the estalished
      "copy_to_auth" privilege (see Section 3.4.1.2.1).  The
      ctap_handle_vers, ctap_handle, ctap_nounce, and ctap_nounce_mic
      are assigned to the vers, handle, nounce, and mic fields of an
      rpc_gss3_gss_binding instance respectively.

   o  The RPCSEC_GSS3_CREATE copy_from_auth message is sent to the
      source server with a QOP of rpc_gss_svc_privacy.  The source
      server unwraps the rpc_gss_svc_privacy RPCSEC_GSS3_CREATE payload
      and verifies the cap_shared_secret_mic by calling GSS_VerifyMIC()
      using the parent context on the cfap_shared_secret from the
      established "copy_from_auth" privilege, and verifies the that the
      ccap_username equals the cfap_username.  The source server then
      locates the ctap_handle in it's GSS context cache and verifies
      that the handle belongs to the user principal that maps to the
      ccap_username and that the cached handle version equals
      ctap_handle_vers.  The ctap_nounce_mic is verified by calling
      GSS_VerifyMIC() on the ctap_nounce using the cached handle
      context.  If all verification succeeds, the "copy_confirm_auth"
      privilege is established on the source server as <
      "copy_confirm_auth", shared_secret_mic, user id, nounce, nounce
      MIC, context handle, context handle version>, and the resultant
      child handle is noted to be acting on behalf of the user
      principal.  If the source server fails to verify either the
      privilege or the compound_binding, the COPY operation will be
      rejected with NFS4ERR_PARTNER_NO_AUTH.

   o  All subsequent ONC RPC requests sent from the destination to copy
      data from the source to the destination will use the RPCSEC_GSSv3
      handle returned by the source's RPCSEC_GSS3_CREATE response.  Note
      that as per the Compound Authenticaion section of [rpcsec_gssv3]
      the resultant RPCSEC_GSSv3 context handle is bound to the user
      principal RPCSEC_GSS context and so it MUST be treated by servers
      as authenticating the user principal.

   Note that the use of the "copy_confirm_auth" privilege accomplishes



Haynes                   Expires August 7, 2014                [Page 28]

Internet-Draft                   NFSv4.2                   February 2014


   the following:

   o  If a protocol like NFS is being used, with export policies, export
      policies can be overridden in case the destination server as-an-
      NFS-client is not authorized

   o  Manual configuration to allow a copy relationship between the
      source and destination is not needed.

3.4.1.2.4.  Finishing or Stoping a Secure Inter-Server Copy

   Under normal operation, the client MUST destroy the copy_from_auth
   and the copy_to_auth RPCSEC_GSSv3 handle once the COPY operation
   returns for a synchronous inter-server copy or a CB_OFFLOAD reports
   the result of an asynchronous copy.

   The copy_confirm_auth privilege and compound authentication
   RPCSEC_GSSv3 handle is constructed from information held by the
   copy_to_auth privilege, and MUST be destroyed by the destination
   server (via an RPCSEC_GSS3_DESTROY call) when the copy_to_auth
   RPCSEC_GSSv3 handle is destroyed.

   If the client sends a OFFLOAD_REVOKE to the source server to rescind
   the destination server's synchronous copy privilege, it uses the
   privileged "copy_from_auth" RPCSEC_GSSv3 handle and the
   cra_destination_server in OFFLOAD_REVOKE MUST be the same as the name
   of the destination server specified in copy_from_auth_priv.  The
   source server will then delete the <"copy_from_auth", user id,
   destination> privilege and fail any subsequent copy requests sent
   under the auspices of this privilege from the destination server.
   The client MUST destroy both the "copy_from_auth" and the
   "copy_to_auth" RPCSEC_GSSv3 handles.

   If the client sends a OFFLOAD_STATUS to the destination server to
   check on the status of an asynchronous copy, it uses the privileged
   "copy_to_auth" RPCSEC_GSSv3 handle and the osa_stateid in
   OFFLOAD_STATUS MUST be the same as the wr_callback_id specified in
   the "copy_to_auth" privilege stored on the destiniation server.

   If the client sends a OFFLOAD_ABORT to the destination server to
   cancel an asynchronous copy, it uses the privileged "copy_to_auth"
   RPCSEC_GSSv3 handle and the oaa_stateid in OFFLOAD_ABORT MUST be the
   same as the wr_callback_id specified in the "copy_to_auth" privilege
   stored on the destiniation server.  The destiniation server will then
   delete the <"copy_to_auth", user id, source list, nounce, nounce MIC,
   context handle, handle version> privilege and the associated
   "copy_confirm_auth" RPCSEC_GSSv3 handle.  The client MUST destroy
   both the copy_to_auth and copy_from_auth RPCSEC_GSSv3 handles.



Haynes                   Expires August 7, 2014                [Page 29]

Internet-Draft                   NFSv4.2                   February 2014


3.4.1.3.  Inter-Server Copy via ONC RPC without RPCSEC_GSS

   ONC RPC security flavors other than RPCSEC_GSS MAY be used with the
   server-side copy offload operations described in this chapter.  In
   particular, host-based ONC RPC security flavors such as AUTH_NONE and
   AUTH_SYS MAY be used.  If a host-based security flavor is used, a
   minimal level of protection for the server-to-server copy protocol is
   possible.

   In the absence of a strong security mechanism designed for the
   purpose, the challenge is how the source server and destination
   server identify themselves to each other, especially in the presence
   of multi-homed source and destination servers.  In a multi-homed
   environment, the destination server might not contact the source
   server from the same network address specified by the client in the
   COPY_NOTIFY.  This can be overcome using the procedure described
   below.

   When the client sends the source server the COPY_NOTIFY operation,
   the source server may reply to the client with a list of target
   addresses, names, and/or URLs and assign them to the unique
   quadruple: <random number, source fh, user ID, destination address
   Y>.  If the destination uses one of these target netlocs to contact
   the source server, the source server will be able to uniquely
   identify the destination server, even if the destination server does
   not connect from the address specified by the client in COPY_NOTIFY.
   The level of assurance in this identification depends on the
   unpredictability, strength and secrecy of the random number.

   For example, suppose the network topology is as shown in Figure 3.
   If the source filehandle is 0x12345, the source server may respond to
   a COPY_NOTIFY for destination 203.0.113.56 with the URLs:

      nfs://203.0.113.18//_COPY/FvhH1OKbu8VrxvV1erdjvR7N/203.0.113.56/
      _FH/0x12345

      nfs://192.0.2.18//_COPY/FvhH1OKbu8VrxvV1erdjvR7N/203.0.113.56/_FH/
      0x12345

   The name component after _COPY is 24 characters of base 64, more than
   enough to encode a 128 bit random number.

   The client will then send these URLs to the destination server in the
   COPY operation.  Suppose that the 192.0.2.0/24 network is a high
   speed network and the destination server decides to transfer the file
   over this network.  If the destination contacts the source server
   from 192.0.2.56 over this network using NFSv4.1, it does the
   following:



Haynes                   Expires August 7, 2014                [Page 30]

Internet-Draft                   NFSv4.2                   February 2014


   COMPOUND  { PUTROOTFH, LOOKUP "_COPY" ; LOOKUP
      "FvhH1OKbu8VrxvV1erdjvR7N" ; LOOKUP "203.0.113.56"; LOOKUP "_FH" ;
      OPEN "0x12345" ; GETFH }

   Provided that the random number is unpredictable and has been kept
   secret by the parties involved, the source server will therefore know
   that these NFSv4.x operations are being issued by the destination
   server identified in the COPY_NOTIFY.  This random number technique
   only provides initial authentication of the destination server, and
   cannot defend against man-in-the-middle attacks after authentication
   or an eavesdropper that observes the random number on the wire.
   Other secure communication techniques (e.g., IPsec) are necessary to
   block these attacks.

   Servers SHOULD reject COPY_NOTIFY requests that do not use RPCSEC_GSS
   with privacy, thus ensuring the URL in the COPY_NOTIFY reply is
   encrypted.  For the same reason, clients SHOULD send COPY requests to
   the destination using RPCSEC_GSS with privacy.

3.4.1.4.  Inter-Server Copy without ONC RPC

   The same techniques as Section 3.4.1.3, using unique URLs for each
   destination server, can be used for other protocols (e.g., HTTP
   [RFC2616] and FTP [RFC0959]) as well.


4.  Support for Application IO Hints

   Applications can issue client I/O hints via posix_fadvise()
   [posix_fadvise] to the NFS client.  While this can help the NFS
   client optimize I/O and caching for a file, it does not allow the NFS
   server and its exported file system to do likewise.  We add an
   IO_ADVISE procedure (Section 14.8) to communicate the client file
   access patterns to the NFS server.  The NFS server upon receiving a
   IO_ADVISE operation MAY choose to alter its I/O and caching behavior,
   but is under no obligation to do so.

   Application specific NFS clients such as those used by hypervisors
   and databases can also leverage application hints to communicate
   their specialized requirements.


5.  Sparse Files

5.1.  Introduction

   A sparse file is a common way of representing a large file without
   having to utilize all of the disk space for it.  Consequently, a



Haynes                   Expires August 7, 2014                [Page 31]

Internet-Draft                   NFSv4.2                   February 2014


   sparse file uses less physical space than its size indicates.  This
   means the file contains 'holes', byte ranges within the file that
   contain no data.  Most modern file systems support sparse files,
   including most UNIX file systems and NTFS, but notably not Apple's
   HFS+.  Common examples of sparse files include Virtual Machine (VM)
   OS/disk images, database files, log files, and even checkpoint
   recovery files most commonly used by the HPC community.

   If an application reads a hole in a sparse file, the file system must
   return all zeros to the application.  For local data access there is
   little penalty, but with NFS these zeroes must be transferred back to
   the client.  If an application uses the NFS client to read data into
   memory, this wastes time and bandwidth as the application waits for
   the zeroes to be transferred.

   A sparse file is typically created by initializing the file to be all
   zeros - nothing is written to the data in the file, instead the hole
   is recorded in the metadata for the file.  So a 8G disk image might
   be represented initially by a couple hundred bits in the inode and
   nothing on the disk.  If the VM then writes 100M to a file in the
   middle of the image, there would now be two holes represented in the
   metadata and 100M in the data.

   Two new operations WRITE_PLUS (Section 14.7) and READ_PLUS
   (Section 14.10) are introduced.  WRITE_PLUS allows for the creation
   of a sparse file and for hole punching.  An application might want to
   zero out a range of the file.  READ_PLUS supports all the features of
   READ but includes an extension to support sparse pattern files
   (Section 7.1.2).  READ_PLUS is guaranteed to perform no worse than
   READ, and can dramatically improve performance with sparse files.
   READ_PLUS does not depend on pNFS protocol features, but can be used
   by pNFS to support sparse files.

5.2.  Terminology

   Regular file:  An object of file type NF4REG or NF4NAMEDATTR.

   Sparse file:  A Regular file that contains one or more Holes.

   Hole:  A byte range within a Sparse file that contains regions of all
      zeroes.  For block-based file systems, this could also be an
      unallocated region of the file.

   Hole Threshold:  The minimum length of a Hole as determined by the
      server.  If a server chooses to define a Hole Threshold, then it
      would not return hole information about holes with a length
      shorter than the Hole Threshold.




Haynes                   Expires August 7, 2014                [Page 32]

Internet-Draft                   NFSv4.2                   February 2014


5.3.  New Operations

   READ_PLUS and WRITE_PLUS are new variants of the NFSv4.1 READ and
   WRITE operations [RFC5661].  Besides being able to support all of the
   data semantics of those operations, they can also be used by the
   client and server to efficiently transfer both holes and ADHs (see
   Section 7.1.1).  As both READ and WRITE are inefficient for transfer
   of sparse sections of the file, they are marked as OBSOLESCENT in
   NFSv4.2.  Instead, a client should utilize READ_PLUS and WRITE_PLUS.
   Note that as the client has no a priori knowledge of whether either
   an ADH or a hole is present or not, if it supports these operations
   and so does the server, then it should always use these operations.

5.3.1.  READ_PLUS

   For holes, READ_PLUS extends the response to avoid returning data for
   portions of the file which are initialized and contain no backing
   store.  Additionally it will do so if the result would appear to be a
   hole.  I.e., if the result was a data block composed entirely of
   zeros, then it is easier to return a hole.  Returning data blocks of
   uninitialized data wastes computational and network resources, thus
   reducing performance.  For ADHs, READ_PLUS is used to return the
   metadata describing the portions of the file which are initialized
   and contain no backing store.

   If the client sends a READ operation, it is explicitly stating that
   it is neither supporting sparse files nor ADHs.  So if a READ occurs
   on a sparse ADH or file, then the server must expand such data to be
   raw bytes.  If a READ occurs in the middle of a hole or ADH, the
   server can only send back bytes starting from that offset.  In
   contrast, if a READ_PLUS occurs in the middle of a hole or ADH, the
   server can send back a range which starts before the offset and
   extends past the range.

5.3.2.  WRITE_PLUS

   WRITE_PLUS can be used to either hole punch or initialize ADHs.  For
   either purpose, the client can avoid the transfer of a repetitive
   pattern across the network.  If the filesystem on the server does not
   support sparse files, the WRITE_PLUS operation may return the result
   asynchronously via the CB_OFFLOAD operation.  As a hole punch may
   entail deallocating data blocks, even if the filesystem supports
   sparse files, it may still have to return the result via CB_OFFLOAD.


6.  Space Reservation





Haynes                   Expires August 7, 2014                [Page 33]

Internet-Draft                   NFSv4.2                   February 2014


6.1.  Introduction

   Applications such as hypervisors want to be able to reserve space for
   a file, report the amount of actual disk space a file occupies, and
   free-up the backing space of a file when it is not required.  In
   virtualized environments, virtual disk files are often stored on NFS
   mounted volumes.  Since virtual disk files represent the hard disks
   of virtual machines, hypervisors often have to guarantee certain
   properties for the file.

   One such example is space reservation.  When a hypervisor creates a
   virtual disk file, it often tries to preallocate the space for the
   file so that there are no future allocation related errors during the
   operation of the virtual machine.  Such errors prevent a virtual
   machine from continuing execution and result in downtime.

   Currently, in order to achieve such a guarantee, applications zero
   the entire file.  The initial zeroing allocates the backing blocks
   and all subsequent writes are overwrites of already allocated blocks.
   This approach is not only inefficient in terms of the amount of I/O
   done, it is also not guaranteed to work on file systems that are log
   structured or deduplicated.  An efficient way of guaranteeing space
   reservation would be beneficial to such applications.

   We define a "reservation" as being the combination of the
   space_reserved attribute (see Section 12.2.4) and the size attribute
   (see Section 5.8.1.5 of [RFC5661]).  If space_reserved attribute is
   set on a file, it is guaranteed that writes that do not grow the file
   past the size will not fail with NFS4ERR_NOSPC.  Once the size is
   changed, then the reservation is changed to that new size.

   Another useful feature is the ability to report the number of blocks
   that would be freed when a file is deleted.  Currently, NFS reports
   two size attributes:

   size  The logical file size of the file.

   space_used  The size in bytes that the file occupies on disk

   While these attributes are sufficient for space accounting in
   traditional file systems, they prove to be inadequate in modern file
   systems that support block sharing.  In such file systems, multiple
   inodes can point to a single block with a block reference count to
   guard against premature freeing.  Having a way to tell the number of
   blocks that would be freed if the file was deleted would be useful to
   applications that wish to migrate files when a volume is low on
   space.




Haynes                   Expires August 7, 2014                [Page 34]

Internet-Draft                   NFSv4.2                   February 2014


   Since virtual disks represent a hard drive in a virtual machine, a
   virtual disk can be viewed as a file system within a file.  Since not
   all blocks within a file system are in use, there is an opportunity
   to reclaim blocks that are no longer in use.  A call to deallocate
   blocks could result in better space efficiency.  Lesser space MAY be
   consumed for backups after block deallocation.

   The following operations and attributes can be used to resolve this
   issues:

   space_reserved  This attribute specifies that writes to the reserved
      area of the file will not fail with NFS4ERR_NOSPACE.

   space_freed  This attribute specifies the space freed when a file is
      deleted, taking block sharing into consideration.

   WRITE_PLUS  This operation zeroes and/or deallocates the blocks
      backing a region of the file.

   If space_used of a file is interpreted to mean the size in bytes of
   all disk blocks pointed to by the inode of the file, then shared
   blocks get double counted, over-reporting the space utilization.
   This also has the adverse effect that the deletion of a file with
   shared blocks frees up less than space_used bytes.

   On the other hand, if space_used is interpreted to mean the size in
   bytes of those disk blocks unique to the inode of the file, then
   shared blocks are not counted in any file, resulting in under-
   reporting of the space utilization.

   For example, two files A and B have 10 blocks each.  Let 6 of these
   blocks be shared between them.  Thus, the combined space utilized by
   the two files is 14 * BLOCK_SIZE bytes.  In the former case, the
   combined space utilization of the two files would be reported as 20 *
   BLOCK_SIZE.  However, deleting either would only result in 4 *
   BLOCK_SIZE being freed.  Conversely, the latter interpretation would
   report that the space utilization is only 8 * BLOCK_SIZE.

   Adding another size attribute, space_freed (see Section 12.2.5), is
   helpful in solving this problem. space_freed is the number of blocks
   that are allocated to the given file that would be freed on its
   deletion.  In the example, both A and B would report space_freed as 4
   * BLOCK_SIZE and space_used as 10 * BLOCK_SIZE.  If A is deleted, B
   will report space_freed as 10 * BLOCK_SIZE as the deletion of B would
   result in the deallocation of all 10 blocks.

   The addition of this problem does not solve the problem of space
   being over-reported.  However, over-reporting is better than under-



Haynes                   Expires August 7, 2014                [Page 35]

Internet-Draft                   NFSv4.2                   February 2014


   reporting.


7.  Application Data Hole Support

   At the OS level, files are contained on disk blocks.  Applications
   are also free to impose structure on the data contained in a file and
   we can define an Application Data Block (ADB) to be such a structure.
   From the application's viewpoint, it only wants to handle ADBs and
   not raw bytes (see [Strohm11]).  An ADB is typically comprised of two
   sections: a header and data.  The header describes the
   characteristics of the block and can provide a means to detect
   corruption in the data payload.  The data section is typically
   initialized to all zeros.

   The format of the header is application specific, but there are two
   main components typically encountered:

   1.  A logical block number which allows the application to determine
       which data block is being referenced.  This is useful when the
       client is not storing the blocks in contiguous memory.

   2.  Fields to describe the state of the ADB and a means to detect
       block corruption.  For both pieces of data, a useful property is
       that allowed values be unique in that if passed across the
       network, corruption due to translation between big and little
       endian architectures are detectable.  For example, 0xF0DEDEF0 has
       the same bit pattern in both architectures.

   Applications already impose structures on files [Strohm11] and detect
   corruption in data blocks [Ashdown08].  What they are not able to do
   is efficiently transfer and store ADBs.  To initialize a file with
   ADBs, the client must send the full ADB to the server and that must
   be stored on the server.

   In this section, we are going to define an Application Data Hole
   (ADH), which is a generic framework for transferring the ADB, present
   one approach to detecting corruption in a given ADH implementation,
   and describe the model for how the client and server can support
   efficient initialization of ADHs, reading of ADH holes, punching ADH
   holes in a file, and space reservation.  We define the ADHN to be the
   Application Data Hole Number, which is the logical block number
   discussed earlier.

7.1.  Generic Framework

   We want the representation of the ADH to be flexible enough to
   support many different applications.  The most basic approach is no



Haynes                   Expires August 7, 2014                [Page 36]

Internet-Draft                   NFSv4.2                   February 2014


   imposition of a block at all, which means we are working with the raw
   bytes.  Such an approach would be useful for storing holes, punching
   holes, etc.  In more complex deployments, a server might be
   supporting multiple applications, each with their own definition of
   the ADH.  One might store the ADHN at the start of the block and then
   have a guard pattern to detect corruption [McDougall07].  The next
   might store the ADHN at an offset of 100 bytes within the block and
   have no guard pattern at all, i.e., existing applications might
   already have well defined formats for their data blocks.

   The guard pattern can be used to represent the state of the block, to
   protect against corruption, or both.  Again, it needs to be able to
   be placed anywhere within the ADH.

   We need to be able to represent the starting offset of the block and
   the size of the block.  Note that nothing prevents the application
   from defining different sized blocks in a file.

7.1.1.  Data Hole Representation

   struct app_data_hole4 {
           offset4         adh_offset;
           length4         adh_block_size;
           length4         adh_block_count;
           length4         adh_reloff_blocknum;
           count4          adh_block_num;
           length4         adh_reloff_pattern;
           opaque          adh_pattern<>;
   };

   The app_data_hole4 structure captures the abstraction presented for
   the ADH.  The additional fields present are to allow the transmission
   of adh_block_count ADHs at one time.  We also use adh_block_num to
   convey the ADHN of the first block in the sequence.  Each ADH will
   contain the same adh_pattern string.

   As both adh_block_num and adh_pattern are optional, if either
   adh_reloff_pattern or adh_reloff_blocknum is set to NFS4_UINT64_MAX,
   then the corresponding field is not set in any of the ADH.












Haynes                   Expires August 7, 2014                [Page 37]

Internet-Draft                   NFSv4.2                   February 2014


7.1.2.  Data Content

   /*
    * Use an enum such that we can extend new types.
    */
   enum data_content4 {
           NFS4_CONTENT_DATA = 0,
           NFS4_CONTENT_APP_DATA_HOLE = 1,
           NFS4_CONTENT_HOLE = 2
   };

   New operations might need to differentiate between wanting to access
   data versus an ADH.  Also, future minor versions might want to
   introduce new data formats.  This enumeration allows that to occur.

7.2.  An Example of Detecting Corruption

   In this section, we define an ADH format in which corruption can be
   detected.  Note that this is just one possible format and means to
   detect corruption.

   Consider a very basic implementation of an operating system's disk
   blocks.  A block is either data or it is an indirect block which
   allows for files to be larger than one block.  It is desired to be
   able to initialize a block.  Lastly, to quickly unlink a file, a
   block can be marked invalid.  The contents remain intact - which
   would enable this OS application to undelete a file.

   The application defines 4k sized data blocks, with an 8 byte block
   counter occurring at offset 0 in the block, and with the guard
   pattern occurring at offset 8 inside the block.  Furthermore, the
   guard pattern can take one of four states:

   0xfeedface -   This is the FREE state and indicates that the ADH
      format has been applied.

   0xcafedead -   This is the DATA state and indicates that real data
      has been written to this block.

   0xe4e5c001 -   This is the INDIRECT state and indicates that the
      block contains block counter numbers that are chained off of this
      block.

   0xba1ed4a3 -   This is the INVALID state and indicates that the block
      contains data whose contents are garbage.

   Finally, it also defines an 8 byte checksum [Baira08] starting at
   byte 16 which applies to the remaining contents of the block.  If the



Haynes                   Expires August 7, 2014                [Page 38]

Internet-Draft                   NFSv4.2                   February 2014


   state is FREE, then that checksum is trivially zero.  As such, the
   application has no need to transfer the checksum implicitly inside
   the ADH - it need not make the transfer layer aware of the fact that
   there is a checksum (see [Ashdown08] for an example of checksums used
   to detect corruption in application data blocks).

   Corruption in each ADH can thus be detected:

   o  If the guard pattern is anything other than one of the allowed
      values, including all zeros.

   o  If the guard pattern is FREE and any other byte in the remainder
      of the ADH is anything other than zero.

   o  If the guard pattern is anything other than FREE, then if the
      stored checksum does not match the computed checksum.

   o  If the guard pattern is INDIRECT and one of the stored indirect
      block numbers has a value greater than the number of ADHs in the
      file.

   o  If the guard pattern is INDIRECT and one of the stored indirect
      block numbers is a duplicate of another stored indirect block
      number.

   As can be seen, the application can detect errors based on the
   combination of the guard pattern state and the checksum.  But also,
   the application can detect corruption based on the state and the
   contents of the ADH.  This last point is important in validating the
   minimum amount of data we incorporated into our generic framework.
   I.e., the guard pattern is sufficient in allowing applications to
   design their own corruption detection.

   Finally, it is important to note that none of these corruption checks
   occur in the transport layer.  The server and client components are
   totally unaware of the file format and might report everything as
   being transferred correctly even in the case the application detects
   corruption.

7.3.  Example of READ_PLUS

   The hypothetical application presented in Section 7.2 can be used to
   illustrate how READ_PLUS would return an array of results.  A file is
   created and initialized with 100 4k ADHs in the FREE state:

      WRITE_PLUS {0, 4k, 100, 0, 0, 8, 0xfeedface}

   Further, assume the application writes a single ADH at 16k, changing



Haynes                   Expires August 7, 2014                [Page 39]

Internet-Draft                   NFSv4.2                   February 2014


   the guard pattern to 0xcafedead, we would then have in memory:

      0 -> (16k - 1)   : 4k, 4, 0, 0, 8, 0xfeedface
      16k -> (20k - 1) : 00 00 00 05 ca fe de ad XX XX ... XX XX
      20k -> 400k      : 4k, 95, 0, 6, 0xfeedface

   And when the client did a READ_PLUS of 64k at the start of the file,
   it would get back a result of an ADH, some data, and a final ADH:

      ADH {0, 4, 0, 0, 8, 0xfeedface}
      data 4k
      ADH {20k, 4k, 59, 0, 6, 0xfeedface}


8.  Labeled NFS

8.1.  Introduction

   Access control models such as Unix permissions or Access Control
   Lists are commonly referred to as Discretionary Access Control (DAC)
   models.  These systems base their access decisions on user identity
   and resource ownership.  In contrast Mandatory Access Control (MAC)
   models base their access control decisions on the label on the
   subject (usually a process) and the object it wishes to access
   [Haynes13].  These labels may contain user identity information but
   usually contain additional information.  In DAC systems users are
   free to specify the access rules for resources that they own.  MAC
   models base their security decisions on a system wide policy
   established by an administrator or organization which the users do
   not have the ability to override.  In this section, we add a MAC
   model to NFSv4.2.

   The first change necessary is to devise a method for transporting and
   storing security label data on NFSv4 file objects.  Security labels
   have several semantics that are met by NFSv4 recommended attributes
   such as the ability to set the label value upon object creation.
   Access control on these attributes are done through a combination of
   two mechanisms.  As with other recommended attributes on file objects
   the usual DAC checks (ACLs and permission bits) will be performed to
   ensure that proper file ownership is enforced.  In addition a MAC
   system MAY be employed on the client, server, or both to enforce
   additional policy on what subjects may modify security label
   information.

   The second change is to provide methods for the client to determine
   if the security label has changed.  A client which needs to know if a
   label is going to change SHOULD request a delegation on that file.
   In order to change the security label, the server will have to recall



Haynes                   Expires August 7, 2014                [Page 40]

Internet-Draft                   NFSv4.2                   February 2014


   all delegations.  This will inform the client of the change.  If a
   client wants to detect if the label has changed, it MAY use VERIFY
   and NVERIFY on FATTR4_CHANGE_SEC_LABEL to detect that the
   FATTR4_SEC_LABEL has been modified.

   An additional useful change would be modification to the RPC layer
   used in NFSv4 to allow RPC calls to carry security labels.  Such
   modifications are outside the scope of this document.

8.2.  Definitions

   Label Format Specifier (LFS):  is an identifier used by the client to
      establish the syntactic format of the security label and the
      semantic meaning of its components.  These specifiers exist in a
      registry associated with documents describing the format and
      semantics of the label.

   Label Format Registry:  is the IANA registry containing all
      registered LFS along with references to the documents that
      describe the syntactic format and semantics of the security label.

   Policy Identifier (PI):  is an optional part of the definition of a
      Label Format Specifier which allows for clients and server to
      identify specific security policies.

   Object:  is a passive resource within the system that we wish to be
      protected.  Objects can be entities such as files, directories,
      pipes, sockets, and many other system resources relevant to the
      protection of the system state.

   Subject:  is an active entity usually a process which is requesting
      access to an object.

   MAC-Aware:  is a server which can transmit and store object labels.

   MAC-Functional:  is a client or server which is Labeled NFS enabled.
      Such a system can interpret labels and apply policies based on the
      security system.

   Multi-Level Security (MLS):  is a traditional model where objects are
      given a sensitivity level (Unclassified, Secret, Top Secret, etc)
      and a category set [Section 46.6. Multi-Level Security (MLS) of Deployment Guide: Deployment, configuration and administration of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 5, Edition 6"">MLS].

8.3.  MAC Security Attribute

   MAC models base access decisions on security attributes bound to
   subjects and objects.  This information can range from a user
   identity for an identity based MAC model, sensitivity levels for



Haynes                   Expires August 7, 2014                [Page 41]

Internet-Draft                   NFSv4.2                   February 2014


   Multi-level security, or a type for Type Enforcement.  These models
   base their decisions on different criteria but the semantics of the
   security attribute remain the same.  The semantics required by the
   security attributes are listed below:

   o  MUST provide flexibility with respect to the MAC model.

   o  MUST provide the ability to atomically set security information
      upon object creation.

   o  MUST provide the ability to enforce access control decisions both
      on the client and the server.

   o  MUST NOT expose an object to either the client or server name
      space before its security information has been bound to it.

   NFSv4 implements the security attribute as a recommended attribute.
   These attributes have a fixed format and semantics, which conflicts
   with the flexible nature of the security attribute.  To resolve this
   the security attribute consists of two components.  The first
   component is a LFS as defined in [Quigley11] to allow for
   interoperability between MAC mechanisms.  The second component is an
   opaque field which is the actual security attribute data.  To allow
   for various MAC models, NFSv4 should be used solely as a transport
   mechanism for the security attribute.  It is the responsibility of
   the endpoints to consume the security attribute and make access
   decisions based on their respective models.  In addition, creation of
   objects through OPEN and CREATE allows for the security attribute to
   be specified upon creation.  By providing an atomic create and set
   operation for the security attribute it is possible to enforce the
   second and fourth requirements.  The recommended attribute
   FATTR4_SEC_LABEL (see Section 12.2.2) will be used to satisfy this
   requirement.

8.3.1.  Delegations

   In the event that a security attribute is changed on the server while
   a client holds a delegation on the file, both the server and the
   client MUST follow the NFSv4.1 protocol (see Chapter 10 of [RFC5661])
   with respect to attribute changes.  It SHOULD flush all changes back
   to the server and relinquish the delegation.

8.3.2.  Permission Checking

   It is not feasible to enumerate all possible MAC models and even
   levels of protection within a subset of these models.  This means
   that the NFSv4 client and servers cannot be expected to directly make
   access control decisions based on the security attribute.  Instead



Haynes                   Expires August 7, 2014                [Page 42]

Internet-Draft                   NFSv4.2                   February 2014


   NFSv4 should defer permission checking on this attribute to the host
   system.  These checks are performed in addition to existing DAC and
   ACL checks outlined in the NFSv4 protocol.  Section 8.6 gives a
   specific example of how the security attribute is handled under a
   particular MAC model.

8.3.3.  Object Creation

   When creating files in NFSv4 the OPEN and CREATE operations are used.
   One of the parameters to these operations is an fattr4 structure
   containing the attributes the file is to be created with.  This
   allows NFSv4 to atomically set the security attribute of files upon
   creation.  When a client is MAC-Functional it must always provide the
   initial security attribute upon file creation.  In the event that the
   server is MAC-Functional as well, it should determine by policy
   whether it will accept the attribute from the client or instead make
   the determination itself.  If the client is not MAC-Functional, then
   the MAC-Functional server must decide on a default label.  A more in
   depth explanation can be found in Section 8.6.

8.3.4.  Existing Objects

   Note that under the MAC model, all objects must have labels.
   Therefore, if an existing server is upgraded to include Labeled NFS
   support, then it is the responsibility of the security system to
   define the behavior for existing objects.

8.3.5.  Label Changes

   If there are open delegations on the file belonging to client other
   than the one making the label change, then the process described in
   Section 8.3.1 must be followed.  In short, the delegation will be
   recalled, which effectively notifies the client of the change.

   Consider a system in which the clients enforce MAC checks and and the
   server has a very simple security system which just stores the
   labels.  In this system, the MAC label check always allows access,
   regardless of the subject label.

   The way in which MAC labels are enforced is by the client.  The
   security policies on the client can be such that the client does not
   have access to the file unless it has a delegation.  The recall of
   the delegation will force the client to flush any cached content of
   the file.  The clients could also be configured to periodically
   VERIFY/NVERIFY the FATTR4_CHANGE_SEC_LABEL attribute to determine
   when the label has changed.  When a change is detected, then the
   client could take the costlier action of retrieving the
   FATTR4_SEC_LABEL.



Haynes                   Expires August 7, 2014                [Page 43]

Internet-Draft                   NFSv4.2                   February 2014


8.4.  pNFS Considerations

   The new FATTR4_SEC_LABEL attribute is metadata information and as
   such the DS is not aware of the value contained on the MDS.
   Fortunately, the NFSv4.1 protocol [RFC5661] already has provisions
   for doing access level checks from the DS to the MDS.  In order for
   the DS to validate the subject label presented by the client, it
   SHOULD utilize this mechanism.

8.5.  Discovery of Server Labeled NFS Support

   The server can easily determine that a client supports Labeled NFS
   when it queries for the FATTR4_SEC_LABEL label for an object.  The
   client might need to discover which LFS the server supports.

   The following compound MUST NOT be denied by any MAC label check:

        PUTROOTFH, GETATTR {FATTR4_SEC_LABEL}

   Note that the server might have imposed a security flavor on the root
   that precludes such access.  I.e., if the server requires kerberized
   access and the client presents a compound with AUTH_SYS, then the
   server is allowed to return NFS4ERR_WRONGSEC in this case.  But if
   the client presents a correct security flavor, then the server MUST
   return the FATTR4_SEC_LABEL attribute with the supported LFS filled
   in.

8.6.  MAC Security NFS Modes of Operation

   A system using Labeled NFS may operate in two modes.  The first mode
   provides the most protection and is called "full mode".  In this mode
   both the client and server implement a MAC model allowing each end to
   make an access control decision.  The remaining mode is called the
   "guest mode" and in this mode one end of the connection is not
   implementing a MAC model and thus offers less protection than full
   mode.

8.6.1.  Full Mode

   Full mode environments consist of MAC-Functional NFSv4 servers and
   clients and may be composed of mixed MAC models and policies.  The
   system requires that both the client and server have an opportunity
   to perform an access control check based on all relevant information
   within the network.  The file object security attribute is provided
   using the mechanism described in Section 8.3.

   Fully MAC-Functional NFSv4 servers are not possible in the absence of
   RPC layer modifications to support subject label transport.  However,



Haynes                   Expires August 7, 2014                [Page 44]

Internet-Draft                   NFSv4.2                   February 2014


   servers may make decisions based on the RPC credential information
   available and future specifications may provide subject label
   transport.

8.6.1.1.  Initial Labeling and Translation

   The ability to create a file is an action that a MAC model may wish
   to mediate.  The client is given the responsibility to determine the
   initial security attribute to be placed on a file.  This allows the
   client to make a decision as to the acceptable security attributes to
   create a file with before sending the request to the server.  Once
   the server receives the creation request from the client it may
   choose to evaluate if the security attribute is acceptable.

   Security attributes on the client and server may vary based on MAC
   model and policy.  To handle this the security attribute field has an
   LFS component.  This component is a mechanism for the host to
   identify the format and meaning of the opaque portion of the security
   attribute.  A full mode environment may contain hosts operating in
   several different LFSs.  In this case a mechanism for translating the
   opaque portion of the security attribute is needed.  The actual
   translation function will vary based on MAC model and policy and is
   out of the scope of this document.  If a translation is unavailable
   for a given LFS then the request MUST be denied.  Another recourse is
   to allow the host to provide a fallback mapping for unknown security
   attributes.

8.6.1.2.  Policy Enforcement

   In full mode access control decisions are made by both the clients
   and servers.  When a client makes a request it takes the security
   attribute from the requesting process and makes an access control
   decision based on that attribute and the security attribute of the
   object it is trying to access.  If the client denies that access an
   RPC call to the server is never made.  If however the access is
   allowed the client will make a call to the NFS server.

   When the server receives the request from the client it uses any
   credential information conveyed in the RPC request and the attributes
   of the object the client is trying to access to make an access
   control decision.  If the server's policy allows this access it will
   fulfill the client's request, otherwise it will return
   NFS4ERR_ACCESS.

   Future protocol extensions may also allow the server to factor into
   the decision a security label extracted from the RPC request.

   Implementations MAY validate security attributes supplied over the



Haynes                   Expires August 7, 2014                [Page 45]

Internet-Draft                   NFSv4.2                   February 2014


   network to ensure that they are within a set of attributes permitted
   from a specific peer, and if not, reject them.  Note that a system
   may permit a different set of attributes to be accepted from each
   peer.

8.6.1.3.  Limited Server

   A Limited Server mode (see Section 3.5.2 of [Haynes13]) consists of a
   server which is label aware, but does not enforce policies.  Such a
   server will store and retrieve all object labels presented by
   clients, utilize the methods described in Section 8.3.5 to allow the
   clients to detect changing labels, but may not factor the label into
   access decisions.  Instead, it will expect the clients to enforce all
   such access locally.

8.6.2.  Guest Mode

   Guest mode implies that either the client or the server does not
   handle labels.  If the client is not Labeled NFS aware, then it will
   not offer subject labels to the server.  The server is the only
   entity enforcing policy, and may selectively provide standard NFS
   services to clients based on their authentication credentials and/or
   associated network attributes (e.g., IP address, network interface).
   The level of trust and access extended to a client in this mode is
   configuration-specific.  If the server is not Labeled NFS aware, then
   it will not return object labels to the client.  Clients in this
   environment are may consist of groups implementing different MAC
   model policies.  The system requires that all clients in the
   environment be responsible for access control checks.

8.7.  Security Considerations

   This entire chapter deals with security issues.

   Depending on the level of protection the MAC system offers there may
   be a requirement to tightly bind the security attribute to the data.

   When only one of the client or server enforces labels, it is
   important to realize that the other side is not enforcing MAC
   protections.  Alternate methods might be in use to handle the lack of
   MAC support and care should be taken to identify and mitigate threats
   from possible tampering outside of these methods.

   An example of this is that a server that modifies READDIR or LOOKUP
   results based on the client's subject label might want to always
   construct the same subject label for a client which does not present
   one.  This will prevent a non-Labeled NFS client from mixing entries
   in the directory cache.



Haynes                   Expires August 7, 2014                [Page 46]

Internet-Draft                   NFSv4.2                   February 2014


9.  Sharing change attribute implementation details with NFSv4 clients

9.1.  Introduction

   Although both the NFSv4 [I-D.ietf-nfsv4-rfc3530bis] and NFSv4.1
   protocol [RFC5661], define the change attribute as being mandatory to
   implement, there is little in the way of guidance.  The only mandated
   feature is that the value must change whenever the file data or
   metadata change.

   While this allows for a wide range of implementations, it also leaves
   the client with a conundrum: how does it determine which is the most
   recent value for the change attribute in a case where several RPC
   calls have been issued in parallel?  In other words if two COMPOUNDs,
   both containing WRITE and GETATTR requests for the same file, have
   been issued in parallel, how does the client determine which of the
   two change attribute values returned in the replies to the GETATTR
   requests correspond to the most recent state of the file?  In some
   cases, the only recourse may be to send another COMPOUND containing a
   third GETATTR that is fully serialized with the first two.

   NFSv4.2 avoids this kind of inefficiency by allowing the server to
   share details about how the change attribute is expected to evolve,
   so that the client may immediately determine which, out of the
   several change attribute values returned by the server, is the most
   recent. change_attr_type is defined as a new recommended attribute
   (see Section 12.2.1), and is per file system.


10.  Security Considerations

   NFSv4.2 has all of the security concerns present in NFSv4.1 (see
   Section 21 of [RFC5661]) and those present in the Server-side Copy
   (see Section 3.4) and in Labeled NFS (see Section 8.7).


11.  Error Values

   NFS error numbers are assigned to failed operations within a Compound
   (COMPOUND or CB_COMPOUND) request.  A Compound request contains a
   number of NFS operations that have their results encoded in sequence
   in a Compound reply.  The results of successful operations will
   consist of an NFS4_OK status followed by the encoded results of the
   operation.  If an NFS operation fails, an error status will be
   entered in the reply and the Compound request will be terminated.






Haynes                   Expires August 7, 2014                [Page 47]

Internet-Draft                   NFSv4.2                   February 2014


11.1.  Error Definitions

                        Protocol Error Definitions

          +-------------------------+--------+------------------+
          | Error                   | Number | Description      |
          +-------------------------+--------+------------------+
          | NFS4ERR_BADLABEL        | 10093  | Section 11.1.3.1 |
          | NFS4ERR_OFFLOAD_DENIED  | 10091  | Section 11.1.2.1 |
          | NFS4ERR_PARTNER_NO_AUTH | 10089  | Section 11.1.2.2 |
          | NFS4ERR_PARTNER_NOTSUPP | 10088  | Section 11.1.2.3 |
          | NFS4ERR_UNION_NOTSUPP   | 10090  | Section 11.1.1.1 |
          | NFS4ERR_WRONG_LFS       | 10092  | Section 11.1.3.2 |
          +-------------------------+--------+------------------+

                                  Table 1

11.1.1.  General Errors

   This section deals with errors that are applicable to a broad set of
   different purposes.

11.1.1.1.  NFS4ERR_UNION_NOTSUPP (Error Code 10090)

   One of the arguments to the operation is a discriminated union and
   while the server supports the given operation, it does not support
   the selected arm of the discriminated union.  For an example, see
   WRITE_PLUS (Section 14.7).

11.1.2.  Server to Server Copy Errors

   These errors deal with the interaction between server to server
   copies.

11.1.2.1.  NFS4ERR_OFFLOAD_DENIED (Error Code 10091)

   The copy offload operation is supported by both the source and the
   destination, but the destination is not allowing it for this file.
   If the client sees this error, it should fall back to the normal copy
   semantics.

11.1.2.2.  NFS4ERR_PARTNER_NO_AUTH (Error Code 10089)

   The source server does not authorize a server-to-server copy offload
   operation.  This may be due to the client's failure to send the
   COPY_NOTIFY operation to the source server, the source server
   receiving a server-to-server copy offload request after the copy
   lease time expired, or for some other permission problem.



Haynes                   Expires August 7, 2014                [Page 48]

Internet-Draft                   NFSv4.2                   February 2014


11.1.2.3.  NFS4ERR_PARTNER_NOTSUPP (Error Code 10088)

   The remote server does not support the server-to-server copy offload
   protocol.

11.1.3.  Labeled NFS Errors

   These errors are used in Labeled NFS.

11.1.3.1.  NFS4ERR_BADLABEL (Error Code 10093)

   The label specified is invalid in some manner.

11.1.3.2.  NFS4ERR_WRONG_LFS (Error Code 10092)

   The LFS specified in the subject label is not compatible with the LFS
   in the object label.

11.2.  New Operations and Their Valid Errors

   This section contains a table that gives the valid error returns for
   each new NFSv4.2 protocol operation.  The error code NFS4_OK
   (indicating no error) is not listed but should be understood to be
   returnable by all new operations.  The error values for all other
   operations are defined in Section 15.2 of [RFC5661].

            Valid Error Returns for Each New Protocol Operation
























Haynes                   Expires August 7, 2014                [Page 49]

Internet-Draft                   NFSv4.2                   February 2014


   +----------------+--------------------------------------------------+
   | Operation      | Errors                                           |
   +----------------+--------------------------------------------------+
   | COPY           | NFS4ERR_ACCESS, NFS4ERR_ADMIN_REVOKED,           |
   |                | NFS4ERR_BADXDR, NFS4ERR_BAD_STATEID,             |
   |                | NFS4ERR_DEADSESSION, NFS4ERR_DELAY,              |
   |                | NFS4ERR_DELEG_REVOKED, NFS4ERR_DQUOT,            |
   |                | NFS4ERR_EXPIRED, NFS4ERR_FBIG,                   |
   |                | NFS4ERR_FHEXPIRED, NFS4ERR_GRACE, NFS4ERR_INVAL, |
   |                | NFS4ERR_IO, NFS4ERR_ISDIR, NFS4ERR_LOCKED,       |
   |                | NFS4ERR_METADATA_NOTSUPP, NFS4ERR_MOVED,         |
   |                | NFS4ERR_NOFILEHANDLE, NFS4ERR_NOSPC,             |
   |                | NFS4ERR_OFFLOAD_DENIED, NFS4ERR_OLD_STATEID,     |
   |                | NFS4ERR_OPENMODE, NFS4ERR_OP_NOT_IN_SESSION,     |
   |                | NFS4ERR_PARTNER_NO_AUTH,                         |
   |                | NFS4ERR_PARTNER_NOTSUPP, NFS4ERR_PNFS_IO_HOLE,   |
   |                | NFS4ERR_PNFS_NO_LAYOUT, NFS4ERR_REP_TOO_BIG,     |
   |                | NFS4ERR_REP_TOO_BIG_TO_CACHE,                    |
   |                | NFS4ERR_REQ_TOO_BIG, NFS4ERR_RETRY_UNCACHED_REP, |
   |                | NFS4ERR_ROFS, NFS4ERR_SERVERFAULT,               |
   |                | NFS4ERR_STALE, NFS4ERR_SYMLINK,                  |
   |                | NFS4ERR_TOO_MANY_OPS, NFS4ERR_WRONG_TYPE         |
   | COPY_NOTIFY    | NFS4ERR_ACCESS, NFS4ERR_ADMIN_REVOKED,           |
   |                | NFS4ERR_BADXDR, NFS4ERR_BAD_STATEID,             |
   |                | NFS4ERR_DEADSESSION, NFS4ERR_DELAY,              |
   |                | NFS4ERR_DELEG_REVOKED, NFS4ERR_EXPIRED,          |
   |                | NFS4ERR_FHEXPIRED, NFS4ERR_GRACE, NFS4ERR_INVAL, |
   |                | NFS4ERR_ISDIR, NFS4ERR_IO, NFS4ERR_LOCKED,       |
   |                | NFS4ERR_MOVED, NFS4ERR_NOFILEHANDLE,             |
   |                | NFS4ERR_OLD_STATEID, NFS4ERR_OPENMODE,           |
   |                | NFS4ERR_OP_NOT_IN_SESSION, NFS4ERR_PNFS_IO_HOLE, |
   |                | NFS4ERR_PNFS_NO_LAYOUT, NFS4ERR_REP_TOO_BIG,     |
   |                | NFS4ERR_REP_TOO_BIG_TO_CACHE,                    |
   |                | NFS4ERR_REQ_TOO_BIG, NFS4ERR_RETRY_UNCACHED_REP, |
   |                | NFS4ERR_SERVERFAULT, NFS4ERR_STALE,              |
   |                | NFS4ERR_SYMLINK, NFS4ERR_TOO_MANY_OPS,           |
   |                | NFS4ERR_WRONG_TYPE                               |
   | OFFLOAD_ABORT  | NFS4ERR_ADMIN_REVOKED, NFS4ERR_BADXDR,           |
   |                | NFS4ERR_BAD_STATEID, NFS4ERR_COMPLETE_ALREADY,   |
   |                | NFS4ERR_DEADSESSION, NFS4ERR_EXPIRED,            |
   |                | NFS4ERR_DELAY, NFS4ERR_GRACE, NFS4ERR_NOTSUPP,   |
   |                | NFS4ERR_OLD_STATEID, NFS4ERR_OP_NOT_IN_SESSION,  |
   |                | NFS4ERR_SERVERFAULT, NFS4ERR_TOO_MANY_OPS        |
   | OFFLOAD_REVOKE | NFS4ERR_ADMIN_REVOKED, NFS4ERR_BADXDR,           |
   |                | NFS4ERR_COMPLETE_ALREADY, NFS4ERR_DELAY,         |
   |                | NFS4ERR_GRACE, NFS4ERR_INVALID, NFS4ERR_MOVED,   |
   |                | NFS4ERR_NOTSUPP, NFS4ERR_OP_NOT_IN_SESSION,      |
   |                | NFS4ERR_SERVERFAULT, NFS4ERR_TOO_MANY_OPS        |



Haynes                   Expires August 7, 2014                [Page 50]

Internet-Draft                   NFSv4.2                   February 2014


   | OFFLOAD_STATUS | NFS4ERR_ADMIN_REVOKED, NFS4ERR_BADXDR,           |
   |                | NFS4ERR_BAD_STATEID, NFS4ERR_COMPLETE_ALREADY,   |
   |                | NFS4ERR_DEADSESSION, NFS4ERR_EXPIRED,            |
   |                | NFS4ERR_DELAY, NFS4ERR_GRACE, NFS4ERR_NOTSUPP,   |
   |                | NFS4ERR_OLD_STATEID, NFS4ERR_OP_NOT_IN_SESSION,  |
   |                | NFS4ERR_SERVERFAULT, NFS4ERR_TOO_MANY_OPS        |
   | READ_PLUS      | NFS4ERR_ACCESS, NFS4ERR_ADMIN_REVOKED,           |
   |                | NFS4ERR_BADXDR, NFS4ERR_BAD_STATEID,             |
   |                | NFS4ERR_DEADSESSION, NFS4ERR_DELAY,              |
   |                | NFS4ERR_DELEG_REVOKED, NFS4ERR_EXPIRED,          |
   |                | NFS4ERR_FHEXPIRED, NFS4ERR_GRACE, NFS4ERR_INVAL, |
   |                | NFS4ERR_ISDIR, NFS4ERR_IO, NFS4ERR_LOCKED,       |
   |                | NFS4ERR_MOVED, NFS4ERR_NOFILEHANDLE,             |
   |                | NFS4ERR_OLD_STATEID, NFS4ERR_OPENMODE,           |
   |                | NFS4ERR_OP_NOT_IN_SESSION, NFS4ERR_PNFS_IO_HOLE, |
   |                | NFS4ERR_PNFS_NO_LAYOUT, NFS4ERR_REP_TOO_BIG,     |
   |                | NFS4ERR_REP_TOO_BIG_TO_CACHE,                    |
   |                | NFS4ERR_REQ_TOO_BIG, NFS4ERR_RETRY_UNCACHED_REP, |
   |                | NFS4ERR_SERVERFAULT, NFS4ERR_STALE,              |
   |                | NFS4ERR_SYMLINK, NFS4ERR_TOO_MANY_OPS,           |
   |                | NFS4ERR_WRONG_TYPE                               |
   | SEEK           | NFS4ERR_ACCESS, NFS4ERR_ADMIN_REVOKED,           |
   |                | NFS4ERR_BADXDR, NFS4ERR_BAD_STATEID,             |
   |                | NFS4ERR_DEADSESSION, NFS4ERR_DELAY,              |
   |                | NFS4ERR_DELEG_REVOKED, NFS4ERR_EXPIRED,          |
   |                | NFS4ERR_FHEXPIRED, NFS4ERR_GRACE, NFS4ERR_INVAL, |
   |                | NFS4ERR_ISDIR, NFS4ERR_IO, NFS4ERR_LOCKED,       |
   |                | NFS4ERR_MOVED, NFS4ERR_NOFILEHANDLE,             |
   |                | NFS4ERR_OLD_STATEID, NFS4ERR_OPENMODE,           |
   |                | NFS4ERR_OP_NOT_IN_SESSION, NFS4ERR_PNFS_IO_HOLE, |
   |                | NFS4ERR_PNFS_NO_LAYOUT, NFS4ERR_REP_TOO_BIG,     |
   |                | NFS4ERR_REP_TOO_BIG_TO_CACHE,                    |
   |                | NFS4ERR_REQ_TOO_BIG, NFS4ERR_RETRY_UNCACHED_REP, |
   |                | NFS4ERR_SERVERFAULT, NFS4ERR_STALE,              |
   |                | NFS4ERR_SYMLINK, NFS4ERR_TOO_MANY_OPS,           |
   |                | NFS4ERR_UNION_NOTSUPP, NFS4ERR_WRONG_TYPE        |
   | SEQUENCE       | NFS4ERR_BADSESSION, NFS4ERR_BADSLOT,             |
   |                | NFS4ERR_BADXDR, NFS4ERR_BAD_HIGH_SLOT,           |
   |                | NFS4ERR_CONN_NOT_BOUND_TO_SESSION,               |
   |                | NFS4ERR_DEADSESSION, NFS4ERR_DELAY,              |
   |                | NFS4ERR_REP_TOO_BIG,                             |
   |                | NFS4ERR_REP_TOO_BIG_TO_CACHE,                    |
   |                | NFS4ERR_REQ_TOO_BIG, NFS4ERR_RETRY_UNCACHED_REP, |
   |                | NFS4ERR_SEQUENCE_POS, NFS4ERR_SEQ_FALSE_RETRY,   |
   |                | NFS4ERR_SEQ_MISORDERED, NFS4ERR_TOO_MANY_OPS     |






Haynes                   Expires August 7, 2014                [Page 51]

Internet-Draft                   NFSv4.2                   February 2014


   | WRITE_PLUS     | NFS4ERR_ACCESS, NFS4ERR_ADMIN_REVOKED,           |
   |                | NFS4ERR_BADXDR, NFS4ERR_BAD_STATEID,             |
   |                | NFS4ERR_DEADSESSION, NFS4ERR_DELAY,              |
   |                | NFS4ERR_DELEG_REVOKED, NFS4ERR_DQUOT,            |
   |                | NFS4ERR_EXPIRED, NFS4ERR_FBIG,                   |
   |                | NFS4ERR_FHEXPIRED, NFS4ERR_GRACE, NFS4ERR_INVAL, |
   |                | NFS4ERR_IO, NFS4ERR_ISDIR, NFS4ERR_LOCKED,       |
   |                | NFS4ERR_MOVED, NFS4ERR_NOFILEHANDLE,             |
   |                | NFS4ERR_NOSPC, NFS4ERR_OLD_STATEID,              |
   |                | NFS4ERR_OPENMODE, NFS4ERR_OP_NOT_IN_SESSION,     |
   |                | NFS4ERR_PNFS_IO_HOLE, NFS4ERR_PNFS_NO_LAYOUT,    |
   |                | NFS4ERR_REP_TOO_BIG,                             |
   |                | NFS4ERR_REP_TOO_BIG_TO_CACHE,                    |
   |                | NFS4ERR_REQ_TOO_BIG, NFS4ERR_RETRY_UNCACHED_REP, |
   |                | NFS4ERR_ROFS, NFS4ERR_SERVERFAULT,               |
   |                | NFS4ERR_STALE, NFS4ERR_SYMLINK,                  |
   |                | NFS4ERR_TOO_MANY_OPS, NFS4ERR_UNION_NOTSUPP,     |
   |                | NFS4ERR_WRONG_TYPE                               |
   +----------------+--------------------------------------------------+

                                  Table 2

11.3.  New Callback Operations and Their Valid Errors

   This section contains a table that gives the valid error returns for
   each new NFSv4.2 callback operation.  The error code NFS4_OK
   (indicating no error) is not listed but should be understood to be
   returnable by all new callback operations.  The error values for all
   other callback operations are defined in Section 15.3 of [RFC5661].

       Valid Error Returns for Each New Protocol Callback Operation

   +------------+------------------------------------------------------+
   | Callback   | Errors                                               |
   | Operation  |                                                      |
   +------------+------------------------------------------------------+
   | CB_OFFLOAD | NFS4ERR_BADHANDLE, NFS4ERR_BADXDR,                   |
   |            | NFS4ERR_BAD_STATEID, NFS4ERR_DELAY,                  |
   |            | NFS4ERR_OP_NOT_IN_SESSION, NFS4ERR_REP_TOO_BIG,      |
   |            | NFS4ERR_REP_TOO_BIG_TO_CACHE, NFS4ERR_REQ_TOO_BIG,   |
   |            | NFS4ERR_RETRY_UNCACHED_REP, NFS4ERR_SERVERFAULT,     |
   |            | NFS4ERR_TOO_MANY_OPS                                 |
   +------------+------------------------------------------------------+

                                  Table 3






Haynes                   Expires August 7, 2014                [Page 52]

Internet-Draft                   NFSv4.2                   February 2014


12.  New File Attributes

12.1.  New RECOMMENDED Attributes - List and Definition References

   The list of new RECOMMENDED attributes appears in Table 4.  The
   meaning of the columns of the table are:

   Name:  The name of the attribute.

   Id:  The number assigned to the attribute.  In the event of conflicts
      between the assigned number and [NFSv42xdr], the latter is likely
      authoritative, but should be resolved with Errata to this document
      and/or [NFSv42xdr].  See [IESG08] for the Errata process.

   Data Type:  The XDR data type of the attribute.

   Acc:  Access allowed to the attribute.

      R  means read-only (GETATTR may retrieve, SETATTR may not set).

      W  means write-only (SETATTR may set, GETATTR may not retrieve).

      R W   means read/write (GETATTR may retrieve, SETATTR may set).

   Defined in:  The section of this specification that describes the
      attribute.

   +------------------+----+-------------------+-----+----------------+
   | Name             | Id | Data Type         | Acc | Defined in     |
   +------------------+----+-------------------+-----+----------------+
   | change_attr_type | 79 | change_attr_type4 | R   | Section 12.2.1 |
   | sec_label        | 80 | sec_label4        | R W | Section 12.2.2 |
   | change_sec_label | 81 | change_sec_label4 | R   | Section 12.2.3 |
   | space_reserved   | 77 | boolean           | R W | Section 12.2.4 |
   | space_freed      | 78 | length4           | R   | Section 12.2.5 |
   +------------------+----+-------------------+-----+----------------+

                                  Table 4

12.2.  Attribute Definitions











Haynes                   Expires August 7, 2014                [Page 53]

Internet-Draft                   NFSv4.2                   February 2014


12.2.1.  Attribute 79: change_attr_type

   enum change_attr_type4 {
              NFS4_CHANGE_TYPE_IS_MONOTONIC_INCR         = 0,
              NFS4_CHANGE_TYPE_IS_VERSION_COUNTER        = 1,
              NFS4_CHANGE_TYPE_IS_VERSION_COUNTER_NOPNFS = 2,
              NFS4_CHANGE_TYPE_IS_TIME_METADATA          = 3,
              NFS4_CHANGE_TYPE_IS_UNDEFINED              = 4
   };

   change_attr_type is a per file system attribute which enables the
   NFSv4.2 server to provide additional information about how it expects
   the change attribute value to evolve after the file data, or metadata
   has changed.  While Section 5.4 of [RFC5661] discusses per file
   system attributes, it is expected that the value of change_attr_type
   not depend on the value of "homogeneous" and only changes in the
   event of a migration.

   NFS4_CHANGE_TYPE_IS_UNDEFINED:  The change attribute does not take
      values that fit into any of these categories.

   NFS4_CHANGE_TYPE_IS_MONOTONIC_INCR:  The change attribute value MUST
      monotonically increase for every atomic change to the file
      attributes, data, or directory contents.

   NFS4_CHANGE_TYPE_IS_VERSION_COUNTER:  The change attribute value MUST
      be incremented by one unit for every atomic change to the file
      attributes, data, or directory contents.  This property is
      preserved when writing to pNFS data servers.

   NFS4_CHANGE_TYPE_IS_VERSION_COUNTER_NOPNFS:  The change attribute
      value MUST be incremented by one unit for every atomic change to
      the file attributes, data, or directory contents.  In the case
      where the client is writing to pNFS data servers, the number of
      increments is not guaranteed to exactly match the number of
      writes.

   NFS4_CHANGE_TYPE_IS_TIME_METADATA:  The change attribute is
      implemented as suggested in the NFSv4 spec
      [I-D.ietf-nfsv4-rfc3530bis] in terms of the time_metadata
      attribute.

   If either NFS4_CHANGE_TYPE_IS_MONOTONIC_INCR,
   NFS4_CHANGE_TYPE_IS_VERSION_COUNTER, or
   NFS4_CHANGE_TYPE_IS_TIME_METADATA are set, then the client knows at
   the very least that the change attribute is monotonically increasing,
   which is sufficient to resolve the question of which value is the
   most recent.



Haynes                   Expires August 7, 2014                [Page 54]

Internet-Draft                   NFSv4.2                   February 2014


   If the client sees the value NFS4_CHANGE_TYPE_IS_TIME_METADATA, then
   by inspecting the value of the 'time_delta' attribute it additionally
   has the option of detecting rogue server implementations that use
   time_metadata in violation of the spec.

   If the client sees NFS4_CHANGE_TYPE_IS_VERSION_COUNTER, it has the
   ability to predict what the resulting change attribute value should
   be after a COMPOUND containing a SETATTR, WRITE, or CREATE.  This
   again allows it to detect changes made in parallel by another client.
   The value NFS4_CHANGE_TYPE_IS_VERSION_COUNTER_NOPNFS permits the
   same, but only if the client is not doing pNFS WRITEs.

   Finally, if the server does not support change_attr_type or if
   NFS4_CHANGE_TYPE_IS_UNDEFINED is set, then the server SHOULD make an
   effort to implement the change attribute in terms of the
   time_metadata attribute.

12.2.2.  Attribute 80: sec_label

   typedef uint32_t  policy4;


   struct labelformat_spec4 {
           policy4 lfs_lfs;
           policy4 lfs_pi;
   };

   struct sec_label4 {
           labelformat_spec4       slai_lfs;
           opaque                  slai_data<>;
   };

   The FATTR4_SEC_LABEL contains an array of two components with the
   first component being an LFS.  It serves to provide the receiving end
   with the information necessary to translate the security attribute
   into a form that is usable by the endpoint.  Label Formats assigned
   an LFS may optionally choose to include a Policy Identifier field to
   allow for complex policy deployments.  The LFS and Label Format
   Registry are described in detail in [Quigley11].  The translation
   used to interpret the security attribute is not specified as part of
   the protocol as it may depend on various factors.  The second
   component is an opaque section which contains the data of the
   attribute.  This component is dependent on the MAC model to interpret
   and enforce.

   In particular, it is the responsibility of the LFS specification to
   define a maximum size for the opaque section, slai_data<>.  When
   creating or modifying a label for an object, the client needs to be



Haynes                   Expires August 7, 2014                [Page 55]

Internet-Draft                   NFSv4.2                   February 2014


   guaranteed that the server will accept a label that is sized
   correctly.  By both client and server being part of a specific MAC
   model, the client will be aware of the size.

   If a server supports sec_label, then it MUST also support
   change_sec_label.  Any modification to sec_label MUST modify the
   value for change_sec_label.

12.2.3.  Attribute 81: change_sec_label

   The change_sec_label attribute is a read-only attribute per file.  If
   the value of sec_label for a file is not the same at two disparate
   times then the values of change_sec_label at those times MUST be
   different as well.  The value of change_sec_label MAY change at other
   times as well, but this should be rare, as that will require the
   client to abort any operation in progress, re-read the label, and
   retry the operation.  As the sec_label is not bounded by size, this
   attribute allows for VERIFY and NVERIFY to quickly determine if the
   sec_label has been modified.

12.2.4.  Attribute 77: space_reserved

   The space_reserve attribute is a read/write attribute of type
   boolean.  It is a per file attribute and applies during the lifetime
   of the file or until it is turned off.  When the space_reserved
   attribute is set via SETATTR, the server must ensure that there is
   disk space to accommodate every byte in the file before it can return
   success.  If the server cannot guarantee this, it must return
   NFS4ERR_NOSPC.

   If the client tries to grow a file which has the space_reserved
   attribute set, the server must guarantee that there is disk space to
   accommodate every byte in the file with the new size before it can
   return success.  If the server cannot guarantee this, it must return
   NFS4ERR_NOSPC.

   It is not required that the server allocate the space to the file
   before returning success.  The allocation can be deferred, however,
   it must be guaranteed that it will not fail for lack of space.

   The value of space_reserved can be obtained at any time through
   GETATTR.  If the size is retrieved at the same time, the client can
   determine the size of the reservation.

   In order to avoid ambiguity, the space_reserve bit cannot be set
   along with the size bit in SETATTR.  Increasing the size of a file
   with space_reserve set will fail if space reservation cannot be
   guaranteed for the new size.  If the file size is decreased, space



Haynes                   Expires August 7, 2014                [Page 56]

Internet-Draft                   NFSv4.2                   February 2014


   reservation is only guaranteed for the new size.  If a hole is
   punched into the file, then the reservation is not changed.

12.2.5.  Attribute 78: space_freed

   space_freed gives the number of bytes freed if the file is deleted.
   This attribute is read only and is of type length4.  It is a per file
   attribute.


13.  Operations: REQUIRED, RECOMMENDED, or OPTIONAL

   The following tables summarize the operations of the NFSv4.2 protocol
   and the corresponding designation of REQUIRED, RECOMMENDED, and
   OPTIONAL to implement or either OBSOLESCENT or MUST NOT implement.
   The designation of OBSOLESCENT is reserved for those operations which
   are defined in either NFSv4.0 or NFSv4.1 and are intended to be
   classified as MUST NOT be implemented in NFSv4.3.  The designation of
   MUST NOT implement is reserved for those operations that were defined
   in either NFSv4.0 or NFSV4.1 and MUST NOT be implemented in NFSv4.2.

   For the most part, the REQUIRED, RECOMMENDED, or OPTIONAL designation
   for operations sent by the client is for the server implementation.
   The client is generally required to implement the operations needed
   for the operating environment for which it serves.  For example, a
   read-only NFSv4.2 client would have no need to implement the WRITE
   operation and is not required to do so.

   The REQUIRED or OPTIONAL designation for callback operations sent by
   the server is for both the client and server.  Generally, the client
   has the option of creating the backchannel and sending the operations
   on the fore channel that will be a catalyst for the server sending
   callback operations.  A partial exception is CB_RECALL_SLOT; the only
   way the client can avoid supporting this operation is by not creating
   a backchannel.

   Since this is a summary of the operations and their designation,
   there are subtleties that are not presented here.  Therefore, if
   there is a question of the requirements of implementation, the
   operation descriptions themselves must be consulted along with other
   relevant explanatory text within this either specification or that of
   NFSv4.1 [RFC5661].

   The abbreviations used in the second and third columns of the table
   are defined as follows.






Haynes                   Expires August 7, 2014                [Page 57]

Internet-Draft                   NFSv4.2                   February 2014


   REQ  REQUIRED to implement

   REC  RECOMMENDED to implement

   OPT  OPTIONAL to implement

   MNI  MUST NOT implement

   OBS  Also OBSOLESCENT for future versions.

   For the NFSv4.2 features that are OPTIONAL, the operations that
   support those features are OPTIONAL, and the server would return
   NFS4ERR_NOTSUPP in response to the client's use of those operations.
   If an OPTIONAL feature is supported, it is possible that a set of
   operations related to the feature become REQUIRED to implement.  The
   third column of the table designates the feature(s) and if the
   operation is REQUIRED or OPTIONAL in the presence of support for the
   feature.

   The OPTIONAL features identified and their abbreviations are as
   follows:

   pNFS  Parallel NFS

   FDELG  File Delegations

   DDELG  Directory Delegations

   COPY  Server Side Copy

   ADH  Application Data Holes

                                Operations

   +----------------------+---------------------+----------------------+
   | Operation            | EOL, REQ, REC, OPT, | Feature (REQ, REC,   |
   |                      | or MNI              | or OPT)              |
   +----------------------+---------------------+----------------------+
   | ACCESS               | REQ                 |                      |
   | BACKCHANNEL_CTL      | REQ                 |                      |
   | BIND_CONN_TO_SESSION | REQ                 |                      |
   | CLOSE                | REQ                 |                      |
   | COMMIT               | REQ                 |                      |
   | COPY                 | OPT                 | COPY (REQ)           |
   | OFFLOAD_ABORT        | OPT                 | COPY (REQ)           |
   | COPY_NOTIFY          | OPT                 | COPY (REQ)           |
   | OFFLOAD_REVOKE       | OPT                 | COPY (REQ)           |
   | OFFLOAD_STATUS       | OPT                 | COPY (REQ)           |



Haynes                   Expires August 7, 2014                [Page 58]

Internet-Draft                   NFSv4.2                   February 2014


   | CREATE               | REQ                 |                      |
   | CREATE_SESSION       | REQ                 |                      |
   | DELEGPURGE           | OPT                 | FDELG (REQ)          |
   | DELEGRETURN          | OPT                 | FDELG, DDELG, pNFS   |
   |                      |                     | (REQ)                |
   | DESTROY_CLIENTID     | REQ                 |                      |
   | DESTROY_SESSION      | REQ                 |                      |
   | EXCHANGE_ID          | REQ                 |                      |
   | FREE_STATEID         | REQ                 |                      |
   | GETATTR              | REQ                 |                      |
   | GETDEVICEINFO        | OPT                 | pNFS (REQ)           |
   | GETDEVICELIST        | OPT                 | pNFS (OPT)           |
   | GETFH                | REQ                 |                      |
   | WRITE_PLUS           | OPT                 | ADH (REQ)            |
   | GET_DIR_DELEGATION   | OPT                 | DDELG (REQ)          |
   | LAYOUTCOMMIT         | OPT                 | pNFS (REQ)           |
   | LAYOUTGET            | OPT                 | pNFS (REQ)           |
   | LAYOUTRETURN         | OPT                 | pNFS (REQ)           |
   | LINK                 | OPT                 |                      |
   | LOCK                 | REQ                 |                      |
   | LOCKT                | REQ                 |                      |
   | LOCKU                | REQ                 |                      |
   | LOOKUP               | REQ                 |                      |
   | LOOKUPP              | REQ                 |                      |
   | NVERIFY              | REQ                 |                      |
   | OPEN                 | REQ                 |                      |
   | OPENATTR             | OPT                 |                      |
   | OPEN_CONFIRM         | MNI                 |                      |
   | OPEN_DOWNGRADE       | REQ                 |                      |
   | PUTFH                | REQ                 |                      |
   | PUTPUBFH             | REQ                 |                      |
   | PUTROOTFH            | REQ                 |                      |
   | READ                 | REQ (OBS)           |                      |
   | READDIR              | REQ                 |                      |
   | READLINK             | OPT                 |                      |
   | READ_PLUS            | OPT                 | ADH (REQ)            |
   | RECLAIM_COMPLETE     | REQ                 |                      |
   | RELEASE_LOCKOWNER    | MNI                 |                      |
   | REMOVE               | REQ                 |                      |
   | RENAME               | REQ                 |                      |
   | RENEW                | MNI                 |                      |
   | RESTOREFH            | REQ                 |                      |
   | SAVEFH               | REQ                 |                      |
   | SECINFO              | REQ                 |                      |
   | SECINFO_NO_NAME      | REC                 | pNFS file layout     |
   |                      |                     | (REQ)                |
   | SEQUENCE             | REQ                 |                      |
   | SETATTR              | REQ                 |                      |



Haynes                   Expires August 7, 2014                [Page 59]

Internet-Draft                   NFSv4.2                   February 2014


   | SETCLIENTID          | MNI                 |                      |
   | SETCLIENTID_CONFIRM  | MNI                 |                      |
   | SET_SSV              | REQ                 |                      |
   | TEST_STATEID         | REQ                 |                      |
   | VERIFY               | REQ                 |                      |
   | WANT_DELEGATION      | OPT                 | FDELG (OPT)          |
   | WRITE                | REQ (OBS)           |                      |
   +----------------------+---------------------+----------------------+

                            Callback Operations

   +-------------------------+-------------------+---------------------+
   | Operation               | REQ, REC, OPT, or | Feature (REQ, REC,  |
   |                         | MNI               | or OPT)             |
   +-------------------------+-------------------+---------------------+
   | CB_OFFLOAD              | OPT               | COPY (REQ)          |
   | CB_GETATTR              | OPT               | FDELG (REQ)         |
   | CB_LAYOUTRECALL         | OPT               | pNFS (REQ)          |
   | CB_NOTIFY               | OPT               | DDELG (REQ)         |
   | CB_NOTIFY_DEVICEID      | OPT               | pNFS (OPT)          |
   | CB_NOTIFY_LOCK          | OPT               |                     |
   | CB_PUSH_DELEG           | OPT               | FDELG (OPT)         |
   | CB_RECALL               | OPT               | FDELG, DDELG, pNFS  |
   |                         |                   | (REQ)               |
   | CB_RECALL_ANY           | OPT               | FDELG, DDELG, pNFS  |
   |                         |                   | (REQ)               |
   | CB_RECALL_SLOT          | REQ               |                     |
   | CB_RECALLABLE_OBJ_AVAIL | OPT               | DDELG, pNFS (REQ)   |
   | CB_SEQUENCE             | OPT               | FDELG, DDELG, pNFS  |
   |                         |                   | (REQ)               |
   | CB_WANTS_CANCELLED      | OPT               | FDELG, DDELG, pNFS  |
   |                         |                   | (REQ)               |
   +-------------------------+-------------------+---------------------+


14.  NFSv4.2 Operations

14.1.  Operation 59: COPY - Initiate a server-side copy













Haynes                   Expires August 7, 2014                [Page 60]

Internet-Draft                   NFSv4.2                   February 2014


14.1.1.  ARGUMENT

   struct COPY4args {
           /* SAVED_FH: source file */
           /* CURRENT_FH: destination file */
           stateid4        ca_src_stateid;
           stateid4        ca_dst_stateid;
           offset4         ca_src_offset;
           offset4         ca_dst_offset;
           length4         ca_count;
           netloc4         ca_source_server<>;
   };


14.1.2.  RESULT

   union COPY4res switch (nfsstat4 cr_status) {
   case NFS4_OK:
           write_response4 resok4;
   default:
           length4         cr_bytes_copied;
   };


14.1.3.  DESCRIPTION

   The COPY operation is used for both intra-server and inter-server
   copies.  In both cases, the COPY is always sent from the client to
   the destination server of the file copy.  The COPY operation requests
   that a file be copied from the location specified by the SAVED_FH
   value to the location specified by the CURRENT_FH.

   The SAVED_FH must be a regular file.  If SAVED_FH is not a regular
   file, the operation MUST fail and return NFS4ERR_WRONG_TYPE.

   In order to set SAVED_FH to the source file handle, the compound
   procedure requesting the COPY will include a sub-sequence of
   operations such as

      PUTFH source-fh
      SAVEFH

   If the request is for a server-to-server copy, the source-fh is a
   filehandle from the source server and the compound procedure is being
   executed on the destination server.  In this case, the source-fh is a
   foreign filehandle on the server receiving the COPY request.  If
   either PUTFH or SAVEFH checked the validity of the filehandle, the
   operation would likely fail and return NFS4ERR_STALE.



Haynes                   Expires August 7, 2014                [Page 61]

Internet-Draft                   NFSv4.2                   February 2014


   If a server supports the server-to-server COPY feature, a PUTFH
   followed by a SAVEFH MUST NOT return NFS4ERR_STALE for either
   operation.  These restrictions do not pose substantial difficulties
   for servers.  The CURRENT_FH and SAVED_FH may be validated in the
   context of the operation referencing them and an NFS4ERR_STALE error
   returned for an invalid file handle at that point.

   For an intra-server copy, both the ca_src_stateid and ca_dst_stateid
   MUST refer to either open or locking states provided earlier by the
   server.  If either stateid is invalid, then the operation MUST fail.
   If the request is for a inter-server copy, then the ca_src_stateid
   can be ignored.  If ca_dst_stateid is invalid, then the operation
   MUST fail.

   The CURRENT_FH specifies the destination of the copy operation.  The
   CURRENT_FH MUST be a regular file and not a directory.  Note, the
   file MUST exist before the COPY operation begins.  It is the
   responsibility of the client to create the file if necessary,
   regardless of the actual copy protocol used.  If the file cannot be
   created in the destination file system (due to file name
   restrictions, such as case or length), the COPY operation MUST NOT be
   called.

   The ca_src_offset is the offset within the source file from which the
   data will be read, the ca_dst_offset is the offset within the
   destination file to which the data will be written, and the ca_count
   is the number of bytes that will be copied.  An offset of 0 (zero)
   specifies the start of the file.  A count of 0 (zero) requests that
   all bytes from ca_src_offset through EOF be copied to the
   destination.  If concurrent modifications to the source file overlap
   with the source file region being copied, the data copied may include
   all, some, or none of the modifications.  The client can use standard
   NFS operations (e.g., OPEN with OPEN4_SHARE_DENY_WRITE or mandatory
   byte range locks) to protect against concurrent modifications if the
   client is concerned about this.  If the source file's end of file is
   being modified in parallel with a copy that specifies a count of 0
   (zero) bytes, the amount of data copied is implementation dependent
   (clients may guard against this case by specifying a non-zero count
   value or preventing modification of the source file as mentioned
   above).

   If the source offset or the source offset plus count is greater than
   or equal to the size of the source file, the operation will fail with
   NFS4ERR_INVAL.  The destination offset or destination offset plus
   count may be greater than the size of the destination file.  This
   allows for the client to issue parallel copies to implement
   operations such as "cat file1 file2 file3 file4 > dest".




Haynes                   Expires August 7, 2014                [Page 62]

Internet-Draft                   NFSv4.2                   February 2014


   If the ca_source_server list is specified, then this is an inter-
   server copy operation and the source file is on a remote server.  The
   client is expected to have previously issued a successful COPY_NOTIFY
   request to the remote source server.  The ca_source_server list MUST
   be the same as the COPY_NOTIFY response's cnr_source_server list.  If
   the client includes the entries from the COPY_NOTIFY response's
   cnr_source_server list in the ca_source_server list, the source
   server can indicate a specific copy protocol for the destination
   server to use by returning a URL, which specifies both a protocol
   service and server name.  Server-to-server copy protocol
   considerations are described in Section 3.2.5 and Section 3.4.1.

   The copying of any and all attributes on the source file is the
   responsibility of both the client and the copy protocol.  Any
   attribute which is both exposed via the NFS protocol on the source
   file and set SHOULD be copied to the destination file.  Any attribute
   supported by the destination server that is not set on the source
   file SHOULD be left unset.  If the client cannot copy an attribute
   from the source to destination, it MAY fail the copy transaction.

   Metadata attributes not exposed via the NFS protocol SHOULD be copied
   to the destination file where appropriate via the copy protocol.
   Note that if the copy protocol is NFSv4.x, then these attributes will
   be lost.

   The destination file's named attributes are not duplicated from the
   source file.  After the copy process completes, the client MAY
   attempt to duplicate named attributes using standard NFSv4
   operations.  However, the destination file's named attribute
   capabilities MAY be different from the source file's named attribute
   capabilities.

   If the operation does not result in an immediate failure, the server
   will return NFS4_OK, and the CURRENT_FH will remain the destination's
   filehandle.

   If an immediate failure does occur, cr_bytes_copied will be set to
   the number of bytes copied to the destination file before the error
   occurred.  The cr_bytes_copied value indicates the number of bytes
   copied but not which specific bytes have been copied.

   A return of NFS4_OK indicates that either the operation is complete
   or the operation was initiated and a callback will be used to deliver
   the final status of the operation.

   If the wr_callback_id is returned, this indicates that the operation
   was initiated and a CB_OFFLOAD callback will deliver the final
   results of the operation.  The wr_callback_id stateid is termed a



Haynes                   Expires August 7, 2014                [Page 63]

Internet-Draft                   NFSv4.2                   February 2014


   copy stateid in this context.  The server is given the option of
   returning the results in a callback because the data may require a
   relatively long period of time to copy.

   If no wr_callback_id is returned, the operation completed
   synchronously and no callback will be issued by the server.  The
   completion status of the operation is indicated by cr_status.

   If the copy completes successfully, either synchronously or
   asynchronously, the data copied from the source file to the
   destination file MUST appear identical to the NFS client.  However,
   the NFS server's on disk representation of the data in the source
   file and destination file MAY differ.  For example, the NFS server
   might encrypt, compress, deduplicate, or otherwise represent the on
   disk data in the source and destination file differently.

14.2.  Operation 60: OFFLOAD_ABORT - Cancel a server-side copy

14.2.1.  ARGUMENT

   struct OFFLOAD_ABORT4args {
           /* CURRENT_FH: destination file */
           stateid4        oaa_stateid;
   };


14.2.2.  RESULT

   struct OFFLOAD_ABORT4res {
           nfsstat4        oar_status;
   };

14.2.3.  DESCRIPTION

   OFFLOAD_ABORT is used for both intra- and inter-server asynchronous
   copies.  The OFFLOAD_ABORT operation allows the client to cancel a
   server-side copy operation that it initiated.  This operation is sent
   in a COMPOUND request from the client to the destination server.
   This operation may be used to cancel a copy when the application that
   requested the copy exits before the operation is completed or for
   some other reason.

   The request contains the filehandle and copy stateid cookies that act
   as the context for the previously initiated copy operation.

   The result's oar_status field indicates whether the cancel was
   successful or not.  A value of NFS4_OK indicates that the copy
   operation was canceled and no callback will be issued by the server.



Haynes                   Expires August 7, 2014                [Page 64]

Internet-Draft                   NFSv4.2                   February 2014


   A copy operation that is successfully canceled may result in none,
   some, or all of the data and/or metadata copied.

   If the server supports asynchronous copies, the server is REQUIRED to
   support the OFFLOAD_ABORT operation.

14.3.  Operation 61: COPY_NOTIFY - Notify a source server of a future
       copy

14.3.1.  ARGUMENT


   struct COPY_NOTIFY4args {
           /* CURRENT_FH: source file */
           stateid4        cna_src_stateid;
           netloc4         cna_destination_server;
   };


14.3.2.  RESULT

   struct COPY_NOTIFY4resok {
           nfstime4        cnr_lease_time;
           netloc4         cnr_source_server<>;
   };

   union COPY_NOTIFY4res switch (nfsstat4 cnr_status) {
   case NFS4_OK:
           COPY_NOTIFY4resok       resok4;
   default:
           void;
   };


14.3.3.  DESCRIPTION

   This operation is used for an inter-server copy.  A client sends this
   operation in a COMPOUND request to the source server to authorize a
   destination server identified by cna_destination_server to read the
   file specified by CURRENT_FH on behalf of the given user.

   The cna_src_stateid MUST refer to either open or locking states
   provided earlier by the server.  If it is invalid, then the operation
   MUST fail.

   The cna_destination_server MUST be specified using the netloc4
   network location format.  The server is not required to resolve the
   cna_destination_server address before completing this operation.



Haynes                   Expires August 7, 2014                [Page 65]

Internet-Draft                   NFSv4.2                   February 2014


   If this operation succeeds, the source server will allow the
   cna_destination_server to copy the specified file on behalf of the
   given user as long as both of the following conditions are met:

   o  The destination server begins reading the source file before the
      cnr_lease_time expires.  If the cnr_lease_time expires while the
      destination server is still reading the source file, the
      destination server is allowed to finish reading the file.

   o  The client has not issued a COPY_REVOKE for the same combination
      of user, filehandle, and destination server.

   The cnr_lease_time is chosen by the source server.  A cnr_lease_time
   of 0 (zero) indicates an infinite lease.  To avoid the need for
   synchronized clocks, copy lease times are granted by the server as a
   time delta.  To renew the copy lease time the client should resend
   the same copy notification request to the source server.

   A successful response will also contain a list of netloc4 network
   location formats called cnr_source_server, on which the source is
   willing to accept connections from the destination.  These might not
   be reachable from the client and might be located on networks to
   which the client has no connection.

   If the client wishes to perform an inter-server copy, the client MUST
   send a COPY_NOTIFY to the source server.  Therefore, the source
   server MUST support COPY_NOTIFY.

   For a copy only involving one server (the source and destination are
   on the same server), this operation is unnecessary.

14.4.  Operation 62: OFFLOAD_REVOKE - Revoke a destination server's copy
       privileges

14.4.1.  ARGUMENT

   struct OFFLOAD_REVOKE4args {
           /* CURRENT_FH: source file */
           netloc4         ora_destination_server;
   };


14.4.2.  RESULT

   struct OFFLOAD_REVOKE4res {
           nfsstat4        orr_status;
   };




Haynes                   Expires August 7, 2014                [Page 66]

Internet-Draft                   NFSv4.2                   February 2014


14.4.3.  DESCRIPTION

   This operation is used for an inter-server copy.  A client sends this
   operation in a COMPOUND request to the source server to revoke the
   authorization of a destination server identified by
   ora_destination_server from reading the file specified by CURRENT_FH
   on behalf of given user.  If the ora_destination_server has already
   begun copying the file, a successful return from this operation
   indicates that further access will be prevented.

   The ora_destination_server MUST be specified using the netloc4
   network location format.  The server is not required to resolve the
   ora_destination_server address before completing this operation.

   The client uses OFFLOAD_ABORT to inform the destination to stop the
   active transfer and OFFLOAD_REVOKE to inform the source to not allow
   any more copy requests from the destination.  The OFFLOAD_REVOKE
   operation is also useful in situations in which the source server
   granted a very long or infinite lease on the destination server's
   ability to read the source file and all copy operations on the source
   file have been completed.

   For a copy only involving one server (the source and destination are
   on the same server), this operation is unnecessary.

   If the server supports COPY_NOTIFY, the server is REQUIRED to support
   the OFFLOAD_REVOKE operation.

14.5.  Operation 63: OFFLOAD_STATUS - Poll for status of a server-side
       copy

14.5.1.  ARGUMENT


   struct OFFLOAD_STATUS4args {
           /* CURRENT_FH: destination file */
           stateid4        osa_stateid;
   };













Haynes                   Expires August 7, 2014                [Page 67]

Internet-Draft                   NFSv4.2                   February 2014


14.5.2.  RESULT

   struct OFFLOAD_STATUS4resok {
           length4         osr_bytes_copied;
           nfsstat4        osr_complete<1>;
   };

   union OFFLOAD_STATUS4res switch (nfsstat4 osr_status) {
   case NFS4_OK:
           OFFLOAD_STATUS4resok            osr_resok4;
   default:
           void;
   };


14.5.3.  DESCRIPTION

   OFFLOAD_STATUS is used for both intra- and inter-server asynchronous
   copies.  The OFFLOAD_STATUS operation allows the client to poll the
   destination server to determine the status of an asynchronous copy
   operation.

   If this operation is successful, the number of bytes copied are
   returned to the client in the osr_bytes_copied field.  The
   osr_bytes_copied value indicates the number of bytes copied but not
   which specific bytes have been copied.

   If the optional osr_complete field is present, the copy has
   completed.  In this case the status value indicates the result of the
   asynchronous copy operation.  In all cases, the server will also
   deliver the final results of the asynchronous copy in a CB_OFFLOAD
   operation.

   The failure of this operation does not indicate the result of the
   asynchronous copy in any way.

   If the server supports asynchronous copies, the server is REQUIRED to
   support the OFFLOAD_STATUS operation.

14.6.  Modification to Operation 42: EXCHANGE_ID - Instantiate Client ID

14.6.1.  ARGUMENT

      /* new */
      const EXCHGID4_FLAG_SUPP_FENCE_OPS      = 0x00000004;






Haynes                   Expires August 7, 2014                [Page 68]

Internet-Draft                   NFSv4.2                   February 2014


14.6.2.  RESULT

      Unchanged

14.6.3.  MOTIVATION

   Enterprise applications require guarantees that an operation has
   either aborted or completed.  NFSv4.1 provides this guarantee as long
   as the session is alive: simply send a SEQUENCE operation on the same
   slot with a new sequence number, and the successful return of
   SEQUENCE indicates the previous operation has completed.  However, if
   the session is lost, there is no way to know when any in progress
   operations have aborted or completed.  In hindsight, the NFSv4.1
   specification should have mandated that DESTROY_SESSION either abort
   or complete all outstanding operations.

14.6.4.  DESCRIPTION

   A client SHOULD request the EXCHGID4_FLAG_SUPP_FENCE_OPS capability
   when it sends an EXCHANGE_ID operation.  The server SHOULD set this
   capability in the EXCHANGE_ID reply whether the client requests it or
   not.  It is the server's return that determines whether this
   capability is in effect.  When it is in effect, the following will
   occur:

   o  The server will not reply to any DESTROY_SESSION invoked with the
      client ID until all operations in progress are completed or
      aborted.

   o  The server will not reply to subsequent EXCHANGE_ID invoked on the
      same client owner with a new verifier until all operations in
      progress on the client ID's session are completed or aborted.

   o  The NFS server SHOULD support client ID trunking, and if it does
      and the EXCHGID4_FLAG_SUPP_FENCE_OPS capability is enabled, then a
      session ID created on one node of the storage cluster MUST be
      destroyable via DESTROY_SESSION.  In addition, DESTROY_CLIENTID
      and an EXCHANGE_ID with a new verifier affects all sessions
      regardless what node the sessions were created on.

14.7.  Operation 64: WRITE_PLUS










Haynes                   Expires August 7, 2014                [Page 69]

Internet-Draft                   NFSv4.2                   February 2014


14.7.1.  ARGUMENT

   struct data_info4 {
           offset4         di_offset;
           length4         di_length;
           bool            di_allocated;
   };


   struct data4 {
           offset4         d_offset;
           bool            d_allocated;
           opaque          d_data<>;
   };



   union write_plus_arg4 switch (data_content4 wpa_content) {
   case NFS4_CONTENT_DATA:
           data4           wpa_data;
   case NFS4_CONTENT_APP_DATA_HOLE:
           app_data_hole4  wpa_adh;
   case NFS4_CONTENT_HOLE:
           data_info4      wpa_hole;
   default:
           void;
   };

   struct WRITE_PLUS4args {
           /* CURRENT_FH: file */
           stateid4        wp_stateid;
           stable_how4     wp_stable;
           write_plus_arg4 wp_data;
   };


14.7.2.  RESULT


   struct write_response4 {
           stateid4        wr_callback_id<1>;
           count4          wr_count;
           stable_how4     wr_committed;
           verifier4       wr_writeverf;
   };






Haynes                   Expires August 7, 2014                [Page 70]

Internet-Draft                   NFSv4.2                   February 2014


   union WRITE_PLUS4res switch (nfsstat4 wp_status) {
   case NFS4_OK:
           write_response4         wp_resok4;
   default:
           void;
   };


14.7.3.  DESCRIPTION

   The WRITE_PLUS operation is an extension of the NFSv4.1 WRITE
   operation (see Section 18.2 of [RFC5661]) and writes data to the
   regular file identified by the current filehandle.  The server MAY
   write fewer bytes than requested by the client.

   The WRITE_PLUS argument is comprised of an array of rpr_contents,
   each of which describe a data_content4 type of data (Section 7.1.2).
   For NFSv4.2, the allowed values are data, ADH, and hole.  The array
   contents MUST be contiguous in the file.  A successful WRITE_PLUS
   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 14.7.3.4).

   WRITE_PLUS has to support all of the errors which are returned by
   WRITE plus NFS4ERR_UNION_NOTSUPP.  If the client asks for a hole and
   the server does not support that arm of the discriminated union, but
   does support one or more additional arms, it can signal to the client
   that it supports the operation, but not the arm with
   NFS4ERR_UNION_NOTSUPP.

   If the client supports WRITE_PLUS and any arm of the discriminated
   union other than NFS4_CONTENT_DATA, it MUST support CB_OFFLOAD.

14.7.3.1.  Data

   The d_offset specifies the offset where the data should be written.
   An d_offset of zero specifies that the write should start at the
   beginning of the file.  The d_count, as encoded as part of the opaque
   data parameter, represents the number of bytes of data that are to be
   written.  If the d_count is zero, the WRITE_PLUS will succeed and
   return a d_count of zero subject to permissions checking.

   Note that d_allocated has no meaning for WRITE_PLUS.

   The data MUST be written synchronously and MUST follow the same
   semantics of COMMIT as does the WRITE operation.





Haynes                   Expires August 7, 2014                [Page 71]

Internet-Draft                   NFSv4.2                   February 2014


14.7.3.2.  Hole punching

   Whenever a client wishes to zero the blocks backing a particular
   region in the file, it calls the WRITE_PLUS operation with the
   current filehandle set to the filehandle of the file in question, and
   the equivalent of start offset and length in bytes of the region set
   in wpa_hole.di_offset and wpa_hole.di_length respectively.  If the
   wpa_hole.di_allocated is set to TRUE, then the blocks will be zeroed
   and if it is set to FALSE, then they will be deallocated.  All
   further reads to this region MUST return zeros until overwritten.
   The filehandle specified must be that of a regular file.

   Situations may arise where di_offset and/or di_offset + di_length
   will not be aligned to a boundary that the server does allocations/
   deallocations in.  For most file systems, this is the block size of
   the file system.  In such a case, the server can deallocate as many
   bytes as it can in the region.  The blocks that cannot be deallocated
   MUST be zeroed.  Except for the block deallocation and maximum hole
   punching capability, a WRITE_PLUS operation is to be treated similar
   to a write of zeroes.

   The server is not required to complete deallocating the blocks
   specified in the operation before returning.  The server SHOULD
   return an asynchronous result if it can determine the operation will
   be long running (see Section 14.7.3.4).

   If used to hole punch, WRITE_PLUS will result in the space_used
   attribute being decreased by the number of bytes that were
   deallocated.  The space_freed attribute may or may not decrease,
   depending on the support and whether the blocks backing the specified
   range were shared or not.  The size attribute will remain unchanged.

   The WRITE_PLUS operation MUST NOT change the space reservation
   guarantee of the file.  While the server can deallocate the blocks
   specified by di_offset and di_length, future writes to this region
   MUST NOT fail with NFSERR_NOSPC.

14.7.3.3.  ADHs

   If the server supports ADHs, then it MUST support the
   NFS4_CONTENT_APP_DATA_HOLE arm of the WRITE_PLUS 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 ADHs using WRITE_PLUS.

   For ADHs, when the client invokes the WRITE_PLUS operation, it has



Haynes                   Expires August 7, 2014                [Page 72]

Internet-Draft                   NFSv4.2                   February 2014


   two desired results:

   1.  The structure described by the app_data_block4 be imposed on the
       file.

   2.  The contents described by the app_data_block4 be sparse.

   If the server supports the WRITE_PLUS operation, it still might not
   support sparse files.  So if it receives the WRITE_PLUS operation,
   then it MUST populate the contents of the file with the initialized
   ADHs.  The server SHOULD return an asynchronous result if it can
   determine the operation will be long running (see Section 14.7.3.4).

   If the data was already initialized, there are two interesting
   scenarios:

   1.  The data blocks are allocated.

   2.  Initializing in the middle of an existing ADH.

   If the data blocks were already allocated, then the WRITE_PLUS is a
   hole punch operation.  If WRITE_PLUS supports sparse files, then the
   data blocks are to be deallocated.  If not, then the data blocks are
   to be rewritten in the indicated ADH format.

   Since the server has no knowledge of ADHs, it should not report
   misaligned creation of ADHs.  Even while it can detect them, it
   cannot disallow them, as the application might be in the process of
   changing the size of the ADHs.  Thus the server must be prepared to
   handle an WRITE_PLUS into an existing ADH.

   This document does not mandate the manner in which the server stores
   ADHs sparsely for a file.  However, if an WRITE_PLUS arrives that
   will force a new ADH to start inside an existing ADH then the server
   will have three ADHs instead of two.  It will have one up to the new
   one for the WRITE_PLUS, one for the WRITE_PLUS, and one for after the
   WRITE_PLUS.  Note that depending on server specific policies for
   block allocation, there may also be some physical blocks allocated to
   align the boundaries.

14.7.3.4.  Asynchronous Transactions

   Both hole punching and ADH initialization may lead to server
   determining to service the operation asynchronously.  If it decides
   to do so, it sets the stateid in wr_callback_id to be that of the
   wp_stateid.  If it does not set the wr_callback_id, then the result
   is synchronous.




Haynes                   Expires August 7, 2014                [Page 73]

Internet-Draft                   NFSv4.2                   February 2014


   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 14.5) to monitor the
   operation and OFFLOAD_ABORT (Section 14.2) to cancel the operation.
   An example of a asynchronous WRITE_PLUS is shown in Figure 6.  Note
   that as with the COPY operation, WRITE_PLUS must provide a stateid
   for tracking the asynchronous operation.

     Client                                  Server
        +                                      +
        |                                      |
        |--- OPEN ---------------------------->| Client opens
        |<------------------------------------/| the file
        |                                      |
        |--- WRITE_PLUS ---------------------->| Client punches
        |<------------------------------------/| a hole
        |                                      |
        |                                      |
        |--- 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_PLUS.

   When CB_OFFLOAD informs the client of the successful WRITE_PLUS, the
   write_response4 embedded in the operation will provide the necessary
   information that a synchronous WRITE_PLUS 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].  I.e., COMMIT works on one or more WRITE
   operations and the WRITE_PLUS 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 operations.




Haynes                   Expires August 7, 2014                [Page 74]

Internet-Draft                   NFSv4.2                   February 2014


14.8.  Operation 67: IO_ADVISE - Application I/O access pattern hints

14.8.1.  ARGUMENT

   enum IO_ADVISE_type4 {
           IO_ADVISE4_NORMAL                       = 0,
           IO_ADVISE4_SEQUENTIAL                   = 1,
           IO_ADVISE4_SEQUENTIAL_BACKWARDS         = 2,
           IO_ADVISE4_RANDOM                       = 3,
           IO_ADVISE4_WILLNEED                     = 4,
           IO_ADVISE4_WILLNEED_OPPORTUNISTIC       = 5,
           IO_ADVISE4_DONTNEED                     = 6,
           IO_ADVISE4_NOREUSE                      = 7,
           IO_ADVISE4_READ                         = 8,
           IO_ADVISE4_WRITE                        = 9,
           IO_ADVISE4_INIT_PROXIMITY               = 10
   };

   struct IO_ADVISE4args {
           /* CURRENT_FH: file */
           stateid4        iar_stateid;
           offset4         iar_offset;
           length4         iar_count;
           bitmap4         iar_hints;
   };

14.8.2.  RESULT


   struct IO_ADVISE4resok {
           bitmap4 ior_hints;
   };

   union IO_ADVISE4res switch (nfsstat4 _status) {
   case NFS4_OK:
           IO_ADVISE4resok resok4;
   default:
           void;
   };


14.8.3.  DESCRIPTION

   The IO_ADVISE operation sends an I/O access pattern hint to the
   server for the owner of the stateid for a given byte range specified
   by iar_offset and iar_count.  The byte range specified by iar_offset
   and iar_count need not currently exist in the file, but the iar_hints
   will apply to the byte range when it does exist.  If iar_count is 0,



Haynes                   Expires August 7, 2014                [Page 75]

Internet-Draft                   NFSv4.2                   February 2014


   all data following iar_offset is specified.  The server MAY ignore
   the advice.

   The following are the allowed hints for a stateid holder:

   IO_ADVISE4_NORMAL  There is no advice to give, this is the default
      behavior.

   IO_ADVISE4_SEQUENTIAL  Expects to access the specified data
      sequentially from lower offsets to higher offsets.

   IO_ADVISE4_SEQUENTIAL_BACKWARDS  Expects to access the specified data
      sequentially from higher offsets to lower offsets.

   IO_ADVISE4_RANDOM  Expects to access the specified data in a random
      order.

   IO_ADVISE4_WILLNEED  Expects to access the specified data in the near
      future.

   IO_ADVISE4_WILLNEED_OPPORTUNISTIC  Expects to possibly access the
      data in the near future.  This is a speculative hint, and
      therefore the server should prefetch data or indirect blocks only
      if it can be done at a marginal cost.

   IO_ADVISE_DONTNEED  Expects that it will not access the specified
      data in the near future.

   IO_ADVISE_NOREUSE  Expects to access the specified data once and then
      not reuse it thereafter.

   IO_ADVISE4_READ  Expects to read the specified data in the near
      future.

   IO_ADVISE4_WRITE  Expects to write the specified data in the near
      future.

   IO_ADVISE4_INIT_PROXIMITY  Informs the server that the data in the
      byte range remains important to the client.

   Since IO_ADVISE is a hint, a server SHOULD NOT return an error and
   invalidate a entire Compound request if one of the sent hints in
   iar_hints is not supported by the server.  Also, the server MUST NOT
   return an error if the client sends contradictory hints to the
   server, e.g., IO_ADVISE4_SEQUENTIAL and IO_ADVISE4_RANDOM in a single
   IO_ADVISE operation.  In these cases, the server MUST return success
   and a ior_hints value that indicates the hint it intends to
   implement.  This may mean simply returning IO_ADVISE4_NORMAL.



Haynes                   Expires August 7, 2014                [Page 76]

Internet-Draft                   NFSv4.2                   February 2014


   The ior_hints returned by the server is primarily for debugging
   purposes since the server is under no obligation to carry out the
   hints that it describes in the ior_hints result.  In addition, while
   the server may have intended to implement the hints returned in
   ior_hints, as time progresses, the server may need to change its
   handling of a given file due to several reasons including, but not
   limited to, memory pressure, additional IO_ADVISE hints sent by other
   clients, and heuristically detected file access patterns.

   The server MAY return different advice than what the client
   requested.  If it does, then this might be due to one of several
   conditions, including, but not limited to another client advising of
   a different I/O access pattern; a different I/O access pattern from
   another client that that the server has heuristically detected; or
   the server is not able to support the requested I/O access pattern,
   perhaps due to a temporary resource limitation.

   Each issuance of the IO_ADVISE operation overrides all previous
   issuances of IO_ADVISE for a given byte range.  This effectively
   follows a strategy of last hint wins for a given stateid and byte
   range.

   Clients should assume that hints included in an IO_ADVISE operation
   will be forgotten once the file is closed.

14.8.4.  IMPLEMENTATION

   The NFS client may choose to issue an IO_ADVISE operation to the
   server in several different instances.

   The most obvious is in direct response to an application's execution
   of posix_fadvise().  In this case, IO_ADVISE4_WRITE and
   IO_ADVISE4_READ may be set based upon the type of file access
   specified when the file was opened.

14.8.5.  IO_ADVISE4_INIT_PROXIMITY

   The IO_ADVISE4_INIT_PROXIMITY hint is non-posix in origin and conveys
   that the client has recently accessed the byte range in its own
   cache.  I.e., it has not accessed it on the server, but it has
   locally.  When the server reaches resource exhaustion, knowing which
   data is more important allows the server to make better choices about
   which data to, for example purge from a cache, or move to secondary
   storage.  It also informs the server which delegations are more
   important, since if delegations are working correctly, once delegated
   to a client and the client has read the content for that byte range,
   a server might never receive another read request for that byte
   range.



Haynes                   Expires August 7, 2014                [Page 77]

Internet-Draft                   NFSv4.2                   February 2014


   This hint is also useful in the case of NFS clients which are network
   booting from a server.  If the first client to be booted sends this
   hint, then it keeps the cache warm for the remaining clients.

14.8.6.  pNFS File Layout Data Type Considerations

   The IO_ADVISE considerations for pNFS are very similar to the COMMIT
   considerations for pNFS.  That is, as with COMMIT, some NFS server
   implementations prefer IO_ADVISE be done on the DS, and some prefer
   it be done on the MDS.

   So for the file's layout type, it is proposed that NFSv4.2 include an
   additional hint NFL42_CARE_IO_ADVISE_THRU_MDS which is valid only on
   NFSv4.2 or higher.  Any file's layout obtained with NFSv4.1 MUST NOT
   have NFL42_UFLG_IO_ADVISE_THRU_MDS set.  Any file's layout obtained
   with NFSv4.2 MAY have NFL42_UFLG_IO_ADVISE_THRU_MDS set.  If the
   client does not implement IO_ADVISE, then it MUST ignore
   NFL42_UFLG_IO_ADVISE_THRU_MDS.

   If NFL42_UFLG_IO_ADVISE_THRU_MDS is set, the client MUST send the
   IO_ADVISE operation to the MDS in order for it to be honored by the
   DS.  Once the MDS receives the IO_ADVISE operation, it will
   communicate the advice to each DS.

   If NFL42_UFLG_IO_ADVISE_THRU_MDS is not set, then the client SHOULD
   send an IO_ADVISE operation to the appropriate DS for the specified
   byte range.  While the client MAY always send IO_ADVISE to the MDS,
   if the server has not set NFL42_UFLG_IO_ADVISE_THRU_MDS, the client
   should expect that such an IO_ADVISE is futile.  Note that a client
   SHOULD use the same set of arguments on each IO_ADVISE sent to a DS
   for the same open file reference.

   The server is not required to support different advice for different
   DS's with the same open file reference.

14.8.6.1.  Dense and Sparse Packing Considerations

   The IO_ADVISE operation MUST use the iar_offset and byte range as
   dictated by the presence or absence of NFL4_UFLG_DENSE.

   E.g., if NFL4_UFLG_DENSE is present, and a READ or WRITE to the DS
   for iar_offset 0 really means iar_offset 10000 in the logical file,
   then an IO_ADVISE for iar_offset 0 means iar_offset 10000.

   E.g., if NFL4_UFLG_DENSE is absent, then a READ or WRITE to the DS
   for iar_offset 0 really means iar_offset 0 in the logical file, then
   an IO_ADVISE for iar_offset 0 means iar_offset 0 in the logical file.




Haynes                   Expires August 7, 2014                [Page 78]

Internet-Draft                   NFSv4.2                   February 2014


   E.g., if NFL4_UFLG_DENSE is present, the stripe unit is 1000 bytes
   and the stripe count is 10, and the dense DS file is serving
   iar_offset 0.  A READ or WRITE to the DS for iar_offsets 0, 1000,
   2000, and 3000, really mean iar_offsets 10000, 20000, 30000, and
   40000 (implying a stripe count of 10 and a stripe unit of 1000), then
   an IO_ADVISE sent to the same DS with an iar_offset of 500, and a
   iar_count of 3000 means that the IO_ADVISE applies to these byte
   ranges of the dense DS file:

     - 500 to 999
     - 1000 to 1999
     - 2000 to 2999
     - 3000 to 3499

   I.e., the contiguous range 500 to 3499 as specified in IO_ADVISE.

   It also applies to these byte ranges of the logical file:

     - 10500 to 10999 (500 bytes)
     - 20000 to 20999 (1000 bytes)
     - 30000 to 30999 (1000 bytes)
     - 40000 to 40499 (500 bytes)
     (total            3000 bytes)

   E.g., if NFL4_UFLG_DENSE is absent, the stripe unit is 250 bytes, the
   stripe count is 4, and the sparse DS file is serving iar_offset 0.
   Then a READ or WRITE to the DS for iar_offsets 0, 1000, 2000, and
   3000, really mean iar_offsets 0, 1000, 2000, and 3000 in the logical
   file, keeping in mind that on the DS file,. byte ranges 250 to 999,
   1250 to 1999, 2250 to 2999, and 3250 to 3999 are not accessible.
   Then an IO_ADVISE sent to the same DS with an iar_offset of 500, and
   a iar_count of 3000 means that the IO_ADVISE applies to these byte
   ranges of the logical file and the sparse DS file:

     - 500 to 999 (500 bytes)   - no effect
     - 1000 to 1249 (250 bytes) - effective
     - 1250 to 1999 (750 bytes) - no effect
     - 2000 to 2249 (250 bytes) - effective
     - 2250 to 2999 (750 bytes) - no effect
     - 3000 to 3249 (250 bytes) - effective
     - 3250 to 3499 (250 bytes) - no effect
     (subtotal      2250 bytes) - no effect
     (subtotal       750 bytes) - effective
     (grand total   3000 bytes) - no effect + effective

   If neither of the flags NFL42_UFLG_IO_ADVISE_THRU_MDS and
   NFL4_UFLG_DENSE are set in the layout, then any IO_ADVISE request
   sent to the data server with a byte range that overlaps stripe unit



Haynes                   Expires August 7, 2014                [Page 79]

Internet-Draft                   NFSv4.2                   February 2014


   that the data server does not serve MUST NOT result in the status
   NFS4ERR_PNFS_IO_HOLE.  Instead, the response SHOULD be successful and
   if the server applies IO_ADVISE hints on any stripe units that
   overlap with the specified range, those hints SHOULD be indicated in
   the response.

14.9.  Changes to Operation 51: LAYOUTRETURN

14.9.1.  Introduction

   In the pNFS description provided in [RFC5661], the client is not
   capable to relay an error code from the DS to the MDS.  In the
   specification of the Objects-Based Layout protocol [RFC5664], use is
   made of the opaque lrf_body field of the LAYOUTRETURN argument to do
   such a relaying of error codes.  In this section, we define a new
   data structure to enable the passing of error codes back to the MDS
   and provide some guidelines on what both the client and MDS should
   expect in such circumstances.

   There are two broad classes of errors, transient and persistent.  The
   client SHOULD strive to only use this new mechanism to report
   persistent errors.  It MUST be able to deal with transient issues by
   itself.  Also, while the client might consider an issue to be
   persistent, it MUST be prepared for the MDS to consider such issues
   to be transient.  A prime example of this is if the MDS fences off a
   client from either a stateid or a filehandle.  The client will get an
   error from the DS and might relay either NFS4ERR_ACCESS or
   NFS4ERR_BAD_STATEID back to the MDS, with the belief that this is a
   hard error.  If the MDS is informed by the client that there is an
   error, it can safely ignore that.  For it, the mission is
   accomplished in that the client has returned a layout that the MDS
   had most likely recalled.

   The client might also need to inform the MDS that it cannot reach one
   or more of the DSes.  While the MDS can detect the connectivity of
   both of these paths:

   o  MDS to DS

   o  MDS to client

   it cannot determine if the client and DS path is working.  As with
   the case of the DS passing errors to the client, it must be prepared
   for the MDS to consider such outages as being transitory.

   The existing LAYOUTRETURN operation is extended by introducing a new
   data structure to report errors, layoutreturn_device_error4.  Also,
   layoutreturn_device_error4 is introduced to enable an array of errors



Haynes                   Expires August 7, 2014                [Page 80]

Internet-Draft                   NFSv4.2                   February 2014


   to be reported.

14.9.2.  ARGUMENT

   The ARGUMENT specification of the LAYOUTRETURN operation in section
   18.44.1 of [RFC5661] is augmented by the following XDR code
   [RFC4506]:

   struct layoutreturn_device_error4 {
           deviceid4       lrde_deviceid;
           nfsstat4        lrde_status;
           nfs_opnum4      lrde_opnum;
   };

   struct layoutreturn_error_report4 {
           layoutreturn_device_error4      lrer_errors<>;
   };

14.9.3.  RESULT

   The RESULT of the LAYOUTRETURN operation is unchanged; see section
   18.44.2 of [RFC5661].

14.9.4.  DESCRIPTION

   The following text is added to the end of the LAYOUTRETURN operation
   DESCRIPTION in section 18.44.3 of [RFC5661].

   When a client uses LAYOUTRETURN with a type of LAYOUTRETURN4_FILE,
   then if the lrf_body field is NULL, it indicates to the MDS that the
   client experienced no errors.  If lrf_body is non-NULL, then the
   field references error information which is layout type specific.
   I.e., the Objects-Based Layout protocol can continue to utilize
   lrf_body as specified in [RFC5664].  For both Files-Based and Block-
   Based Layouts, the field references a layoutreturn_device_error4,
   which contains an array of layoutreturn_device_error4.

   Each individual layoutreturn_device_error4 describes a single error
   associated with a DS, which is identified via lrde_deviceid.  The
   operation which returned the error is identified via lrde_opnum.
   Finally the NFS error value (nfsstat4) encountered is provided via
   lrde_status and may consist of the following error codes:

   NFS4ERR_NXIO:  The client was unable to establish any communication
      with the DS.






Haynes                   Expires August 7, 2014                [Page 81]

Internet-Draft                   NFSv4.2                   February 2014


   NFS4ERR_*:  The client was able to establish communication with the
      DS and is returning one of the allowed error codes for the
      operation denoted by lrde_opnum.

14.9.5.  IMPLEMENTATION

   The following text is added to the end of the LAYOUTRETURN operation
   IMPLEMENTATION in section 18.4.4 of [RFC5661].

   Clients are expected to tolerate transient storage device errors, and
   hence clients SHOULD NOT use the LAYOUTRETURN error handling for
   device access problems that may be transient.  The methods by which a
   client decides whether a device access problem is transient vs.
   persistent are implementation-specific, but may include retrying I/Os
   to a data server under appropriate conditions.

   When an I/O fails to a storage device, the client SHOULD retry the
   failed I/O via the MDS.  In this situation, before retrying the I/O,
   the client SHOULD return the layout, or the affected portion thereof,
   and SHOULD indicate which storage device or devices was problematic.
   The client needs to do this when the DS is being unresponsive in
   order to fence off any failed write attempts, and ensure that they do
   not end up overwriting any later data being written through the MDS.
   If the client does not do this, the MDS MAY issue a layout recall
   callback in order to perform the retried I/O.

   The client needs to be cognizant that since this error handling is
   optional in the MDS, the MDS may silently ignore this functionality.
   Also, as the MDS may consider some issues the client reports to be
   expected (see Section 14.9.1), the client might find it difficult to
   detect a MDS which has not implemented error handling via
   LAYOUTRETURN.

   If an MDS is aware that a storage device is proving problematic to a
   client, the MDS SHOULD NOT include that storage device in any pNFS
   layouts sent to that client.  If the MDS is aware that a storage
   device is affecting many clients, then the MDS SHOULD NOT include
   that storage device in any pNFS layouts sent out.  If a client asks
   for a new layout for the file from the MDS, it MUST be prepared for
   the MDS to return that storage device in the layout.  The MDS might
   not have any choice in using the storage device, i.e., there might
   only be one possible layout for the system.  Also, in the case of
   existing files, the MDS might have no choice in which storage devices
   to hand out to clients.

   The MDS is not required to indefinitely retain per-client storage
   device error information.  An MDS is also not required to
   automatically reinstate use of a previously problematic storage



Haynes                   Expires August 7, 2014                [Page 82]

Internet-Draft                   NFSv4.2                   February 2014


   device; administrative intervention may be required instead.

14.10.  Operation 65: READ_PLUS

14.10.1.  ARGUMENT

   struct READ_PLUS4args {
           /* CURRENT_FH: file */
           stateid4        rpa_stateid;
           offset4         rpa_offset;
           count4          rpa_count;
   };

14.10.2.  RESULT

   struct data_info4 {
           offset4         di_offset;
           length4         di_length;
           bool            di_allocated;
   };


   struct data4 {
           offset4         d_offset;
           bool            d_allocated;
           opaque          d_data<>;
   };
























Haynes                   Expires August 7, 2014                [Page 83]

Internet-Draft                   NFSv4.2                   February 2014


   union read_plus_content switch (data_content4 rpc_content) {
   case NFS4_CONTENT_DATA:
           data4           rpc_data;
   case NFS4_CONTENT_APP_DATA_HOLE:
           app_data_hole4  rpc_adh;
   case NFS4_CONTENT_HOLE:
           data_info4      rpc_hole;
   default:
           void;
   };

   /*
    * 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;
   };


14.10.3.  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 a rpa_offset of where the READ_PLUS is to start
   and a rpa_count of how many bytes are to be read.  A rpa_offset of
   zero means to read data 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 describe a data_content4 type of data (Section 7.1.2).  For
   NFSv4.2, the allowed values are data, ADH, and hole.  A server is
   required to support the data type, but neither ADH nor hole.  Both an
   ADH and a hole must be returned in its 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.  The array
   contents MUST be contiguous in the file.



Haynes                   Expires August 7, 2014                [Page 84]

Internet-Draft                   NFSv4.2                   February 2014


   If the data to be returned is comprised entirely of zeros, then the
   server may elect to return that data as a hole.  The server
   differentiates this to the client by setting di_allocated to TRUE in
   this case.  Note that in such a scenario, the server is not required
   to determine the full extent of the "hole" - it does not need to
   determine where the zeros start and end.  If the server elects to
   return the hole as data, then it can set the d_allocted to FALSE in
   the rpc_data to indicate it is a hole.

   The server may elect to return adjacent elements of the same type.
   For example, the guard pattern or block size of an ADH might change,
   which would require adjacent elements of type ADH.  Likewise 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.

   If the client specifies a 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 an rpa_offset and rpa_count value that is
   entirely contained within a hole of the file, then the di_offset and
   di_length returned must be for the entire hole.  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 zeroes; the implied
   holes contents lifetime MUST be exactly the same as any other read
   data.

   If the client specifies an rpa_offset and rpa_count value that begins
   in a non-hole of the file but extends into 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, 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-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



Haynes                   Expires August 7, 2014                [Page 85]

Internet-Draft                   NFSv4.2                   February 2014


   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.

   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.

14.10.4.  IMPLEMENTATION

   In general, the IMPLEMENTATION notes for READ in Section 18.22.4 of
   [RFC5661] also apply to READ_PLUS.  One delta is that when the owner
   has a locked byte range, the server MUST return an array of
   rpr_contents with values inside that range.

14.10.4.1.  Additional pNFS Implementation Information

   With pNFS, the semantics of using READ_PLUS remains the same.  Any
   data server MAY return a hole or ADH 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.

   A data server should do its best to return as much information about
   a ADH as is feasible without having to contact the metadata server.
   If communication with the metadata server is required, then every
   attempt should be taken to minimize the number of requests.

   If mandatory locking is enforced, then the data server must also
   ensure that to return only information that is within the owner's
   locked byte range.







Haynes                   Expires August 7, 2014                [Page 86]

Internet-Draft                   NFSv4.2                   February 2014


14.10.5.  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 uses a Hole Threshold of 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 5

   Under the given circumstances, if a client was to read from the file
   with a max read size of 64K, the following will be the results for
   the given READ_PLUS calls.  This assumes 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
       Hole Threshhold, the first 32K of the file is returned as data
       and the remaining 32K is returned as a hole which 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
       there is no more data in the file.






Haynes                   Expires August 7, 2014                [Page 87]

Internet-Draft                   NFSv4.2                   February 2014


14.11.  Operation 66: SEEK

   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 lseek(2) to allow clients to determine
   SEEK_HOLE and SEEK_DATA.

14.11.1.  ARGUMENT

   struct SEEK4args {
           /* CURRENT_FH: file */
           stateid4        sa_stateid;
           offset4         sa_offset;
           data_content4   sa_what;
   };

14.11.2.  RESULT


   union seek_content switch (data_content4 content) {
   case NFS4_CONTENT_DATA:
           data_info4      sc_data;
   case NFS4_CONTENT_APP_DATA_HOLE:
           app_data_hole4  sc_adh;
   case NFS4_CONTENT_HOLE:
           data_info4      sc_hole;
   default:
           void;
   };

   struct seek_res4 {
           bool                    sr_eof;
           seek_content            sr_contents;
   };

   union SEEK4res switch (nfsstat4 status) {
   case NFS4_OK:
           seek_res4       resok4;
   default:
           void;
   };

14.11.3.  DESCRIPTION

   From the given sa_offset, find the next data_content4 of type sa_what
   in the file.  For either a hole or ADH, this must return the
   data_content4 in its entirety.  For data, it must not return the
   actual data.



Haynes                   Expires August 7, 2014                [Page 88]

Internet-Draft                   NFSv4.2                   February 2014


   SEEK must follow the same rules for stateids as READ_PLUS
   (Section 14.10.3).

   If the server could not find a corresponding sa_what, then the status
   would still be NFS4_OK, but sr_eof would be TRUE.  The sr_contents
   would contain a zero-ed out content of the appropriate type.


15.  NFSv4.2 Callback Operations

15.1.  Operation 15: CB_OFFLOAD - Report results of an asynchronous
       operation

15.1.1.  ARGUMENT


   struct write_response4 {
           stateid4        wr_callback_id<1>;
           count4          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;
   };

15.1.2.  RESULT

   struct CB_OFFLOAD4res {
           nfsstat4        cor_status;
   };

15.1.3.  DESCRIPTION

   CB_OFFLOAD is used to report to the client the results of an
   asynchronous operation, e.g., Server-side Copy or a hole punch.  The
   coa_fh and coa_stateid identify the transaction and the coa_status



Haynes                   Expires August 7, 2014                [Page 89]

Internet-Draft                   NFSv4.2                   February 2014


   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 either

   1.  the COPY operation

   2.  the WRITE_PLUS operation and any arm of the discriminated union
       other than NFS4_CONTENT_DATA

   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.  Sections 2.10.6.3 and 20.9.3 of [RFC5661] describe how
   to handle this type of issue.

15.1.3.1.  Server-side Copy

   CB_OFFLOAD is used for both intra- and inter-server asynchronous
   copies.  This operation is sent by the destination server to the
   client in a CB_COMPOUND request.  Upon success, the
   coa_resok4.wr_count presents the total number of bytes copied.

15.1.3.2.  WRITE_PLUS

   CB_OFFLOAD is used to report the completion of either a hole punch or
   an ADH initialization.  Upon success, the coa_resok4 will contain the
   same information that a synchronous WRITE_PLUS would have returned.


16.  IANA Considerations

   This section uses terms that are defined in [RFC5226].


17.  References

17.1.  Normative References

   [NFSv42xdr]
              Haynes, T., "Network File System (NFS) Version 4 Minor
              Version 2 External Data Representation Standard (XDR)
              Description", March 2013.




Haynes                   Expires August 7, 2014                [Page 90]

Internet-Draft                   NFSv4.2                   February 2014


   [RFC3986]  Berners-Lee, T., Fielding, R., and L. Masinter, "Uniform
              Resource Identifier (URI): Generic Syntax", STD 66,
              RFC 3986, January 2005.

   [RFC5661]  Shepler, S., Eisler, M., and D. Noveck, "Network File
              System (NFS) Version 4 Minor Version 1 Protocol",
              RFC 5661, January 2010.

   [RFC5664]  Halevy, B., Welch, B., and J. Zelenka, "Object-Based
              Parallel NFS (pNFS) Operations", RFC 5664, January 2010.

   [posix_fadvise]
              The Open Group, "Section 'posix_fadvise()' of System
              Interfaces of The Open Group Base Specifications Issue 6,
              IEEE Std 1003.1, 2004 Edition", 2004.

   [rpcsec_gssv3]
              Adamson, W. and N. Williams, "Remote Procedure Call (RPC)
              Security Version 3", October 2013.

17.2.  Informative References

   [Ashdown08]
              Ashdown, L., "Chapter 15, Validating Database Files and
              Backups, of Oracle Database Backup and Recovery User's
              Guide 11g Release 1 (11.1)", August 2008.

   [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.

   [FEDFS-ADMIN]
              Lentini, J., Everhart, C., Ellard, D., Tewari, R., and M.
              Naik, "Administration Protocol for Federated Filesystems",
              draft-ietf-nfsv4-federated-fs-admin (Work In Progress),
              2010.

   [FEDFS-NSDB]
              Lentini, J., Everhart, C., Ellard, D., Tewari, R., and M.
              Naik, "NSDB Protocol for Federated Filesystems",
              draft-ietf-nfsv4-federated-fs-protocol (Work In Progress),
              2010.

   [Haynes13]
              Haynes, T., "Requirements for Labeled NFS",
              draft-ietf-nfsv4-labreqs-04 (work in progress), 2013.



Haynes                   Expires August 7, 2014                [Page 91]

Internet-Draft                   NFSv4.2                   February 2014


   [I-D.ietf-nfsv4-rfc3530bis]
              Haynes, T. and D. Noveck, "Network File System (NFS)
              version 4 Protocol", draft-ietf-nfsv4-rfc3530bis-25 (Work
              In Progress), February 2013.

   [IESG08]   ISEG, "IESG Processing of RFC Errata for the IETF Stream",
              2008.

   [MLS]      "Section 46.6. Multi-Level Security (MLS) of Deployment
              Guide: Deployment, configuration and administration of Red
              Hat Enterprise Linux 5, Edition 6", 2011.

   [McDougall07]
              McDougall, R. and J. Mauro, "Section 11.4.3, Detecting
              Memory Corruption of Solaris Internals", 2007.

   [Quigley11]
              Quigley, D. and J. Lu, "Registry Specification for MAC
              Security Label Formats",
              draft-quigley-label-format-registry (work in progress),
              2011.

   [RFC0959]  Postel, J. and J. Reynolds, "File Transfer Protocol",
              STD 9, RFC 959, October 1985.

   [RFC2119]  Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
              Requirement Levels", March 1997.

   [RFC2616]  Fielding, R., Gettys, J., Mogul, J., Frystyk, H.,
              Masinter, L., Leach, P., and T. Berners-Lee, "Hypertext
              Transfer Protocol -- HTTP/1.1", RFC 2616, June 1999.

   [RFC4506]  Eisler, M., "XDR: External Data Representation Standard",
              RFC 4506, May 2006.

   [RFC5226]  Narten, T. and H. Alvestrand, "Guidelines for Writing an
              IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", BCP 26, RFC 5226,
              May 2008.

   [Strohm11]
              Strohm, R., "Chapter 2, Data Blocks, Extents, and
              Segments, of Oracle Database Concepts 11g Release 1
              (11.1)", January 2011.


Appendix A.  Acknowledgments

   For the pNFS Access Permissions Check, the original draft was by



Haynes                   Expires August 7, 2014                [Page 92]

Internet-Draft                   NFSv4.2                   February 2014


   Sorin Faibish, David Black, Mike Eisler, and Jason Glasgow.  The work
   was influenced by discussions with Benny Halevy and Bruce Fields.  A
   review was done by Tom Haynes.

   For the Sharing change attribute implementation details with NFSv4
   clients, the original draft was by Trond Myklebust.

   For the NFS Server-side Copy, the original draft 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 was 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.

   For the NFS space reservation operations, the original draft was by
   Mike Eisler, James Lentini, Manjunath Shankararao, and Rahul Iyer.

   For the sparse file support, the original draft 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 IO Hints, the original draft 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 draft was by David Quigley, James
   Morris, Jarret 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.

   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.


Appendix B.  RFC Editor Notes

   [RFC Editor: please remove this section prior to publishing this
   document as an RFC]

   [RFC Editor: prior to publishing this document as an RFC, please
   replace all occurrences of RFCTBD10 with RFCxxxx where xxxx is the
   RFC number of this document]



Haynes                   Expires August 7, 2014                [Page 93]

Internet-Draft                   NFSv4.2                   February 2014


Author's Address

   Thomas Haynes (editor)
   NetApp
   495 E Java Dr
   Sunnyvale, CA  95054
   USA

   Phone: +1 408 419 3018
   Email: thomas@netapp.com









































Haynes                   Expires August 7, 2014                [Page 94]


Html markup produced by rfcmarkup 1.109, available from https://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcmarkup/