[Docs] [txt|pdf] [Tracker] [WG] [Email] [Nits] [IPR]

Versions: 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 RFC 5661

NFS version 4                                                 S. Shepler
Internet-Draft                                    Sun Microsystems, Inc.
Expires: April 20, 2006                                 October 17, 2005


                     NFS version 4 Minor Version 1
                   draft-ietf-nfsv4-minorversion1-00

Status of this Memo

   By submitting this Internet-Draft, each author represents that any
   applicable patent or other IPR claims of which he or she is aware
   have been or will be disclosed, and any of which he or she becomes
   aware will be disclosed, in accordance with Section 6 of BCP 79.

   Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
   Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups.  Note that
   other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-
   Drafts.

   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."

   The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at
   http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt.

   The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at
   http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html.

   This Internet-Draft will expire on April 20, 2006.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2005).

Abstract

   This document is the first I-D that pulls together the major
   proposals that have been made for inclusion in NFS version 4 minor
   version 1.









Shepler                  Expires April 20, 2006                 [Page 1]


Internet-Draft        NFS version 4 Minor Version 1         October 2005


Table of Contents

   1.  Requirements notation  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  4
   2.  Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  5
   3.  Security Negotiation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  6
   4.  Clarification of Security Negotiation in NFSv4.1 . . . . . . .  7
     4.1.  PUTFH + LOOKUP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  7
     4.2.  PUTFH + LOOKUPP  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  7
     4.3.  PUTFH + SECINFO  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  7
     4.4.  PUTFH + Anything Else  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  8
   5.  NFSv4.1 Sessions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  9
     5.1.  Sessions Background  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  9
       5.1.1.  Introduction to Sessions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  9
       5.1.2.  Motivation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
       5.1.3.  Problem Statement  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
       5.1.4.  NFSv4 Session Extension Characteristics  . . . . . . . 12
     5.2.  Transport Issues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
       5.2.1.  Session Model  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
       5.2.2.  Connection State . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
       5.2.3.  NFSv4 Channels, Sessions and Connections . . . . . . . 15
       5.2.4.  Reconnection, Trunking and Failover  . . . . . . . . . 17
       5.2.5.  Server Duplicate Request Cache . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
     5.3.  Session Initialization and Transfer Models . . . . . . . . 19
       5.3.1.  Session Negotiation  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
       5.3.2.  RDMA Requirements  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
       5.3.3.  RDMA Connection Resources  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
       5.3.4.  TCP and RDMA Inline Transfer Model . . . . . . . . . . 22
       5.3.5.  RDMA Direct Transfer Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
     5.4.  Connection Models  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
       5.4.1.  TCP Connection Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
       5.4.2.  Negotiated RDMA Connection Model . . . . . . . . . . . 29
       5.4.3.  Automatic RDMA Connection Model  . . . . . . . . . . . 30
     5.5.  Buffer Management, Transfer, Flow Control  . . . . . . . . 30
     5.6.  Retry and Replay . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
     5.7.  The Back Channel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
     5.8.  COMPOUND Sizing Issues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
     5.9.  Data Alignment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
     5.10. NFSv4 Integration  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
       5.10.1. Minor Versioning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
       5.10.2. Slot Identifiers and Server Duplicate Request Cache  . 37
       5.10.3. COMPOUND and CB_COMPOUND . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
       5.10.4. eXternal Data Representation Efficiency  . . . . . . . 42
       5.10.5. Effect of Sessions on Existing Operations  . . . . . . 42
       5.10.6. Authentication Efficiencies  . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
     5.11. Sessions Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44
       5.11.1. Authentication . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45
   6.  Directory Delegations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47
     6.1.  Introduction to Directory Delegations  . . . . . . . . . . 47



Shepler                  Expires April 20, 2006                 [Page 2]


Internet-Draft        NFS version 4 Minor Version 1         October 2005


     6.2.  Directory Delegation Design (in brief) . . . . . . . . . . 48
     6.3.  Recommended Attributes in support of Directory
           Delegations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
     6.4.  Delegation Recall  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50
     6.5.  Delegation Recovery  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50
   7.  NFSv4.1 Operations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
     7.1.  LOOKUPP - Lookup Parent Directory  . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
     7.2.  SECINFO -- 33 Obtain Available Security  . . . . . . . . . 52
     7.3.  SECINFO_NO_NAME - Get Security on Unnamed Object . . . . . 55
     7.4.  CREATECLIENTID - Instantiate Clientid  . . . . . . . . . . 57
     7.5.  CREATESESSION - Create New Session and Confirm Clientid  . 63
     7.6.  BIND_BACKCHANNEL - Create a callback channel binding . . . 68
     7.7.  DESTROYSESSION - Destroy existing session  . . . . . . . . 71
     7.8.  SEQUENCE - Supply per-procedure sequencing and control . . 72
     7.9.  CB_RECALLCREDIT - change flow control limits . . . . . . . 73
     7.10. CB_SEQUENCE - Supply callback channel sequencing and
           control  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74
     7.11. GET_DIR_DELEGATION - Get a directory delegation  . . . . . 76
     7.12. CB_NOTIFY - Notify directory changes . . . . . . . . . . . 79
     7.13. CB_RECALL_ANY - Keep any N delegations . . . . . . . . . . 83
   8.  Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 85
   9.  Security Considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 86
   10. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 86
   Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87
   Intellectual Property and Copyright Statements . . . . . . . . . . 88


























Shepler                  Expires April 20, 2006                 [Page 3]


Internet-Draft        NFS version 4 Minor Version 1         October 2005


1.  Requirements notation

   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 [RFC2119].














































Shepler                  Expires April 20, 2006                 [Page 4]


Internet-Draft        NFS version 4 Minor Version 1         October 2005


2.  Introduction

   NFS version 4 Minor Version 1 is defined in this document.  Minor
   version 1 includes minor extensions for SECINFO usage, sessions, and
   directory delegations.














































Shepler                  Expires April 20, 2006                 [Page 5]


Internet-Draft        NFS version 4 Minor Version 1         October 2005


3.  Security Negotiation

   The NFSv4.0 specification contains three oversights and ambiguities
   with respect to the SECINFO operation.

   First, it is impossible for the client to use the SECINFO operation
   to determine the correct security triple for accessing a parent
   directory.  This is because SECINFO takes as arguments the current
   file handle and a component name.  However, NFSv4.0 uses the LOOKUPP
   operation to get the parent directory of the current file handle.  If
   the client uses the wrong security when issuing the LOOKUPP, and gets
   back an NFS4ERR_WRONGSEC error, SECINFO is useless to the client.
   The client is left with guessing which security the server will
   accept.  This defeats the purpose of SECINFO, which was to provide an
   efficient method of negotiating security.

   Second, there is ambiguity as to what the server should do when it is
   passed a LOOKUP operation such that the server restricts access to
   the current file handle with one security triple, and access to the
   component with a different triple, and remote procedure call uses one
   of the two security triples.  Should the server allow the LOOKUP?

   Third, there is a problem as to what the client must do (or can do),
   whenever the server returns NFS4ERR_WRONGSEC in response to a PUTFH
   operation.  The NFSv4.0 specification says that client should issue a
   SECINFO using the parent filehandle and the component name of the
   filehandle that PUTFH was issued with.  This may not be convenient
   for the client.

   This document resolves the above three issues in the context of
   NFSv4.1.




















Shepler                  Expires April 20, 2006                 [Page 6]


Internet-Draft        NFS version 4 Minor Version 1         October 2005


4.  Clarification of Security Negotiation in NFSv4.1

   This section attempts to clarify NFSv4.1 security negotiation issues.
   Unless noted otherwise, for any mention of PUTFH in this section, the
   reader should interpret it as applying to PUTROOTFH and PUTPUBFH in
   addition to PUTFH.

4.1.  PUTFH + LOOKUP

   The server implementation may decide whether to impose any
   restrictions on export security administration.  There are at least
   three approaches (Sc is the flavor set of the child export, Sp that
   of the parent),

     a) Sc <= Sp (<= for subset)

     b) Sc ^ Sp != {} (^ for intersection, {} for the empty set)

     c) free form

   To support b (when client chooses a flavor that is not a member of
   Sp) and c, PUTFH must NOT return NFS4ERR_WRONGSEC in case of security
   mismatch.  Instead, it should be returned from the LOOKUP that
   follows.

   Since the above guideline does not contradict a, it should be
   followed in general.

4.2.  PUTFH + LOOKUPP

   Since SECINFO only works its way down, there is no way LOOKUPP can
   return NFS4ERR_WRONGSEC without the server implementing
   SECINFO_NO_NAME.  SECINFO_NO_NAME solves this issue because via style
   "parent", it works in the opposite direction as SECINFO (component
   name is implicit in this case).

4.3.  PUTFH + SECINFO

   This case should be treated specially.

   A security sensitive client should be allowed to choose a strong
   flavor when querying a server to determine a file object's permitted
   security flavors.  The security flavor chosen by the client does not
   have to be included in the flavor list of the export.  Of course the
   server has to be configured for whatever flavor the client selects,
   otherwise the request will fail at RPC authentication.

   In theory, there is no connection between the security flavor used by



Shepler                  Expires April 20, 2006                 [Page 7]


Internet-Draft        NFS version 4 Minor Version 1         October 2005


   SECINFO and those supported by the export.  But in practice, the
   client may start looking for strong flavors from those supported by
   the export, followed by those in the mandatory set.

4.4.  PUTFH + Anything Else

   PUTFH must return NFS4ERR_WRONGSEC in case of security mismatch.
   This is the most straightforward approach without having to add
   NFS4ERR_WRONGSEC to every other operations.

   PUTFH + SECINFO_NO_NAME (style "current_fh") is needed for the client
   to recover from NFS4ERR_WRONGSEC.







































Shepler                  Expires April 20, 2006                 [Page 8]


Internet-Draft        NFS version 4 Minor Version 1         October 2005


5.  NFSv4.1 Sessions

5.1.  Sessions Background

5.1.1.  Introduction to Sessions

   This draft proposes extensions to NFS version 4 [RFC3530] enabling it
   to support sessions and endpoint management, and to support operation
   atop RDMA-capable RPC over transports such as iWARP.  [RDMAP, DDP]
   These extensions enable support for exactly-once semantics by NFSv4
   servers, multipathing and trunking of transport connections, and
   enhanced security.  The ability to operate over RDMA enables greatly
   enhanced performance.  Operation over existing TCP is enhanced as
   well.

   While discussed here with respect to IETF-chartered transports, the
   proposed protocol is intended to function over other standards, such
   as Infiniband.  [IB]

   The following are the major aspects of this proposal:

      Changes are proposed within the framework of NFSv4 minor
      versioning.  RPC, XDR, and the NFSv4 procedures and operations are
      preserved.  The proposed extension functions equally well over
      existing transports and RDMA, and interoperates transparently with
      existing implementations, both at the local programmatic interface
      and over the wire.

      An explicit session is introduced to NFSv4, and new operations are
      added to support it.  The session allows for enhanced trunking,
      failover and recovery, and authentication efficiency, along with
      necessary support for RDMA.  The session is implemented as
      operations within NFSv4 COMPOUND and does not impact layering or
      interoperability with existing NFSv4 implementations.  The NFSv4
      callback channel is dynamically associated and is connected by the
      client and not the server, enhancing security and operation
      through firewalls.  In fact, the callback channel will be enabled
      to share the same connection as the operations channel.

      An enhanced RPC layer enables NFSv4 operation atop RDMA.  The
      session assists RDMA-mode connection, and additional facilities
      are provided for managing RDMA resources at both NFSv4 server and
      client.  Existing NFSv4 operations continue to function as before,
      though certain size limits are negotiated.  A companion draft to
      this document, "RDMA Transport for ONC RPC" [RPCRDMA] is to be
      referenced for details of RPC RDMA support.





Shepler                  Expires April 20, 2006                 [Page 9]


Internet-Draft        NFS version 4 Minor Version 1         October 2005


      Support for exactly-once semantics ("EOS") is enabled by the new
      session facilities, by providing to the server a way to bound the
      size of the duplicate request cache for a single client, and to
      manage its persistent storage.


                                   Block Diagram

             +-----------------+-------------------------------------+
             |     NFSv4       |     NFSv4 + session extensions      |
             +-----------------+------+----------------+-------------+
             |      Operations        |   Session      |             |
             +------------------------+----------------+             |
             |                RPC/XDR                  |             |
             +-------------------------------+---------+             |
             |       Stream Transport        |    RDMA Transport     |
             +-------------------------------+-----------------------+

5.1.2.  Motivation

   NFS version 4 [RFC3530] has been granted "Proposed Standard" status.
   The NFSv4 protocol was developed along several design points,
   important among them: effective operation over wide-area networks,
   including the Internet itself; strong security integrated into the
   protocol; extensive cross-platform interoperability including
   integrated locking semantics compatible with multiple operating
   systems; and protocol extensibility.

   The NFS version 4 protocol, however, does not provide support for
   certain important transport aspects.  For example, the protocol does
   not address response caching, which is required to provide
   correctness for retried client requests across a network partition,
   nor does it provide an interoperable way to support trunking and
   multipathing of connections.  This leads to inefficiencies,
   especially where trunking and multipathing are concerned, and
   presents additional difficulties in supporting RDMA fabrics, in which
   endpoints may require dedicated or specialized resources.  Sessions
   can be employed to unify NFS-level constructs such as the clientid,
   with transport-level constructs such as transport endpoints.  Each
   transport endpoint draws on resources via its membership in a
   session.  Resource management can be more strictly maintained,
   leading to greater server efficiency in implementing the protocol.
   The enhanced operation over a session affords an opportunity to the
   server to implement a highly reliable duplicate request cache, and
   thereby export exactly-once semantics.

   NFSv4 advances the state of high-performance local sharing, by virtue
   of its integrated security, locking, and delegation, and its



Shepler                  Expires April 20, 2006                [Page 10]


Internet-Draft        NFS version 4 Minor Version 1         October 2005


   excellent coverage of the sharing semantics of multiple operating
   systems.  It is precisely this environment where exactly-once
   semantics become a fundamental requirement.

   Additionally, efforts to standardize a set of protocols for Remote
   Direct Memory Access, RDMA, over the Internet Protocol Suite have
   made significant progress.  RDMA is a general solution to the problem
   of CPU overhead incurred due to data copies, primarily at the
   receiver.  Substantial research has addressed this and has borne out
   the efficacy of the approach.  An overview of this is the RDDP
   Problem Statement document, [RDDPPS].

   Numerous upper layer protocols achieve extremely high bandwidth and
   low overhead through the use of RDMA.  Products from a wide variety
   of vendors employ RDMA to advantage, and prototypes have demonstrated
   the effectiveness of many more.  Here, we are concerned specifically
   with NFS and NFS-style upper layer protocols; examples from Network
   Appliance [DAFS, DCK+03], Fujitsu Prime Software Technologies [FJNFS,
   FJDAFS] and Harvard University [KM02] are all relevant.

   By layering a session binding for NFS version 4 directly atop a
   standard RDMA transport, a greatly enhanced level of performance and
   transparency can be supported on a wide variety of operating system
   platforms.  These combined capabilities alter the landscape between
   local filesystems and network attached storage, enable a new level of
   performance, and lead new classes of application to take advantage of
   NFS.

5.1.3.  Problem Statement

   Two issues drive the current proposal: correctness, and performance.
   Both are instances of "raising the bar" for NFS, whereby the desire
   to use NFS in new classes applications can be accommodated by
   providing the basic features to make such use feasible.  Such
   applications include tightly coupled sharing environments such as
   cluster computing, high performance computing (HPC) and information
   processing such as databases.  These trends are explored in depth in
   [NFSPS].

   The first issue, correctness, exemplified among the attributes of
   local filesystems, is support for exactly-once semantics.  Such
   semantics have not been reliably available with NFS.  Server-based
   duplicate request caches [CJ89] help, but do not reliably provide
   strict correctness.  For the type of application which is expected to
   make extensive use of the high-performance RDMA-enabled environment,
   the reliable provision of such semantics is a fundamental
   requirement.




Shepler                  Expires April 20, 2006                [Page 11]


Internet-Draft        NFS version 4 Minor Version 1         October 2005


   Introduction of a session to NFSv4 will address these issues.  With
   higher performance and enhanced semantics comes the problem of
   enabling advanced endpoint management, for example high-speed
   trunking, multipathing and failover.  These characteristics enable
   availability and performance.  RFC3530 presents some issues in
   permitting a single clientid to access a server over multiple
   connections.

   A second issue encountered in common by NFS implementations is the
   CPU overhead required to implement the protocol.  Primary among the
   sources of this overhead is the movement of data from NFS protocol
   messages to its eventual destination in user buffers or aligned
   kernel buffers.  The data copies consume system bus bandwidth and CPU
   time, reducing the available system capacity for applications.
   [RDDPPS] Achieving zero-copy with NFS has to date required
   sophisticated, "header cracking" hardware and/or extensive platform-
   specific virtual memory mapping tricks.

   Combined in this way, NFSv4, RDMA and the emerging high-speed network
   fabrics will enable delivery of performance which matches that of the
   fastest local filesystems, preserving the key existing local
   filesystem semantics, while enhancing them by providing network
   filesystem sharing semantics.

   RDMA implementations generally have other interesting properties,
   such as hardware assisted protocol access, and support for user space
   access to I/O. RDMA is compelling here for another reason; hardware
   offloaded networking support in itself does not avoid data copies,
   without resorting to implementing part of the NFS protocol in the
   NIC.  Support of RDMA by NFS enables the highest performance at the
   architecture level rather than by implementation; this enables
   ubiquitous and interoperable solutions.

   By providing file access performance equivalent to that of local file
   systems, NFSv4 over RDMA will enable applications running on a set of
   client machines to interact through an NFSv4 file system, just as
   applications running on a single machine might interact through a
   local file system.

   This raises the issue of whether additional protocol enhancements to
   enable such interaction would be desirable and what such enhancements
   would be.  This is a complicated issue which the working group needs
   to address and will not be further discussed in this document.

5.1.4.  NFSv4 Session Extension Characteristics

   This draft will present a solution based upon minor versioning of
   NFSv4.  It will introduce a session to collect transport endpoints



Shepler                  Expires April 20, 2006                [Page 12]


Internet-Draft        NFS version 4 Minor Version 1         October 2005


   and resources such as reply caching, which in turn enables
   enhancements such as trunking, failover and recovery.  It will
   describe use of RDMA by employing support within an underlying RPC
   layer [RPCRDMA].  Most importantly, it will focus on making the best
   possible use of an RDMA transport.

   These extensions are proposed as elements of a new minor revision of
   NFS version 4.  In this draft, NFS version 4 will be referred to
   generically as "NFSv4", when describing properties common to all
   minor versions.  When referring specifically to properties of the
   original, minor version 0 protocol, "NFSv4.0" will be used, and
   changes proposed here for minor version 1 will be referred to as
   "NFSv4.1".

   This draft proposes only changes which are strictly upward-
   compatible with existing RPC and NFS Application Programming
   Interfaces (APIs).

5.2.  Transport Issues

   The Transport Issues section of the document explores the details of
   utilizing the various supported transports.

5.2.1.  Session Model

   The first and most evident issue in supporting diverse transports is
   how to provide for their differences.  This draft proposes
   introducing an explicit session.

   A session introduces minimal protocol requirements, and provides for
   a highly useful and convenient way to manage numerous endpoint-
   related issues.  The session is a local construct; it represents a
   named, higher-layer object to which connections can refer, and
   encapsulates properties important to each associated client.

   A session is a dynamically created, long-lived server object created
   by a client, used over time from one or more transport connections.
   Its function is to maintain the server's state relative to the
   connection(s) belonging to a client instance.  This state is entirely
   independent of the connection itself.  The session in effect becomes
   the object representing an active client on a connection or set of
   connections.

   Clients may create multiple sessions for a single clientid, and may
   wish to do so for optimization of transport resources, buffers, or
   server behavior.  A session could be created by the client to
   represent a single mount point, for separate read and write
   "channels", or for any number of other client-selected parameters.



Shepler                  Expires April 20, 2006                [Page 13]


Internet-Draft        NFS version 4 Minor Version 1         October 2005


   The session enables several things immediately.  Clients may
   disconnect and reconnect (voluntarily or not) without loss of context
   at the server.  (Of course, locks, delegations and related
   associations require special handling, and generally expire in the
   extended absence of an open connection.)  Clients may connect
   multiple transport endpoints to this common state.  The endpoints may
   have all the same attributes, for instance when trunked on multiple
   physical network links for bandwidth aggregation or path failover.
   Or, the endpoints can have specific, special purpose attributes such
   as callback channels.

   The NFSv4 specification does not provide for any form of flow
   control; instead it relies on the windowing provided by TCP to
   throttle requests.  This unfortunately does not work with RDMA, which
   in general provides no operation flow control and will terminate a
   connection in error when limits are exceeded.  Limits are therefore
   exchanged when a session is created; These limits then provide maxima
   within which each session's connections must operate, they are
   managed within these limits as described in [RPCRDMA].  The limits
   may also be modified dynamically at the server's choosing by
   manipulating certain parameters present in each NFSv4.1 request.

   The presence of a maximum request limit on the session bounds the
   requirements of the duplicate request cache.  This can be used to
   advantage by a server, which can accurately determine any storage
   needs and enable it to maintain duplicate request cache persistence
   and to provide reliable exactly-once semantics.

   Finally, given adequate connection-oriented transport security
   semantics, authentication and authorization may be cached on a per-
   session basis, enabling greater efficiency in the issuing and
   processing of requests on both client and server.  A proposal for
   transparent, server-driven implementation of this in NFSv4 has been
   made.  [CCM] The existence of the session greatly facilitates the
   implementation of this approach.  This is discussed in detail in the
   Authentication Efficiencies section later in this draft.

5.2.2.  Connection State

   In RFC3530, the combination of a connected transport endpoint and a
   clientid forms the basis of connection state.  While has been made to
   be workable with certain limitations, there are difficulties in
   correct and robust implementation.  The NFSv4.0 protocol must provide
   a server-initiated connection for the callback channel, and must
   carefully specify the persistence of client state at the server in
   the face of transport interruptions.  The server has only the
   client's transport address binding (the IP 4-tuple) to identify the
   client RPC transaction stream and to use as a lookup tag on the



Shepler                  Expires April 20, 2006                [Page 14]


Internet-Draft        NFS version 4 Minor Version 1         October 2005


   duplicate request cache.  (A useful overview of this is in [RW96].)
   If the server listens on multiple adddresses, and the client connects
   to more than one, it must employ different clientid's on each,
   negating its ability to aggregate bandwidth and redundancy.  In
   effect, each transport connection is used as the server's
   representation of client state.  But, transport connections are
   potentially fragile and transitory.

   In this proposal, a session identifier is assigned by the server upon
   initial session negotiation on each connection.  This identifier is
   used to associate additional connections, to renegotiate after a
   reconnect, to provide an abstraction for the various session
   properties, and to address the duplicate request cache.  No
   transport-specific information is used in the duplicate request cache
   implementation of an NFSv4.1 server, nor in fact the RPC XID itself.
   The session identifier is unique within the server's scope and may be
   subject to certain server policies such as being bounded in time.

   It is envisioned that the primary transport model will be connection
   oriented.  Connection orientation brings with it certain potential
   optimizations, such as caching of per-connection properties, which
   are easily leveraged through the generality of the session.  However,
   it is possible that in future, other transport models could be
   accommodated below the session abstraction.

5.2.3.  NFSv4 Channels, Sessions and Connections

   There are at least two types of NFSv4 channels: the "operations"
   channel used for ordinary requests from client to server, and the
   "back" channel, used for callback requests from server to client.

   As mentioned above, different NFSv4 operations on these channels can
   lead to different resource needs.  For example, server callback
   operations (CB_RECALL) are specific, small messages which flow from
   server to client at arbitrary times, while data transfers such as
   read and write have very different sizes and asymmetric behaviors.
   It is sometimes impractical for the RDMA peers (NFSv4 client and
   NFSv4 server) to post buffers for these various operations on a
   single connection.  Commingling of requests with responses at the
   client receive queue is particularly troublesome, due both to the
   need to manage both solicited and unsolicited completions, and to
   provision buffers for both purposes.  Due to the lack of any ordering
   of callback requests versus response arrivals, without any other
   mechanisms, the client would be forced to allocate all buffers sized
   to the worst case.

   The callback requests are likely to be handled by a different task
   context from that handling the responses.  Significant demultiplexing



Shepler                  Expires April 20, 2006                [Page 15]


Internet-Draft        NFS version 4 Minor Version 1         October 2005


   and thread management may be required if both are received on the
   same queue.  However, if callbacks are relatively rare (perhaps due
   to client access patterns), many of these difficulties can be
   minimized.

   Also, the client may wish to perform trunking of operations channel
   requests for performance reasons, or multipathing for availability.
   This proposal permits both, as well as many other session and
   connection possibilities, by permitting each operation to carry
   session membership information and to share session (and clientid)
   state in order to draw upon the appropriate resources.  For example,
   reads and writes may be assigned to specific, optimized connections,
   or sorted and separated by any or all of size, idempotency, etc.

   To address the problems described above, this proposal allows
   multiple sessions to share a clientid, as well as for multiple
   connections to share a session.

   Single Connection model:

                            NFSv4.1 Session
                               /      \
                Operations_Channel   [Back_Channel]
                                \    /
                             Connection
                                  |


        Multi-connection trunked model (2 operations channels shown):

                            NFSv4.1 Session
                               /      \
                Operations_Channels  [Back_Channel]
                    |          |               |
                Connection Connection     [Connection]
                    |          |               |


        Multi-connection split-use model (2 mounts shown):

                                     NFSv4.1 Session
                                   /                 \
                            (/home)        (/usr/local - readonly)
                            /      \                    |
             Operations_Channel  [Back_Channel]         |
                     |                 |          Operations_Channel
                 Connection       [Connection]          |
                     |                 |            Connection



Shepler                  Expires April 20, 2006                [Page 16]


Internet-Draft        NFS version 4 Minor Version 1         October 2005


                                                        |

   In this way, implementation as well as resource management may be
   optimized.  Each session will have its own response caching and
   buffering, and each connection or channel will have its own transport
   resources, as appropriate.  Clients which do not require certain
   behaviors may optimize such resources away completely, by using
   specific sessions and not even creating the additional channels and
   connections.

5.2.4.  Reconnection, Trunking and Failover

   Reconnection after failure references stored state on the server
   associated with lease recovery during the grace period.  The session
   provides a convenient handle for storing and managing information
   regarding the client's previous state on a per- connection basis,
   e.g. to be used upon reconnection.  Reconnection to a previously
   existing session, and its stored resources, are covered in the
   "Connection Models" section below.

   One important aspect of reconnection is that of RPC library support.
   Traditionally, an Upper Layer RPC-based Protocol such as NFS leaves
   all transport knowledge to the RPC layer implementation below it.
   This allows NFS to operate over a wide variety of transports and has
   proven to be a highly successful approach.  The session, however,
   introduces an abstraction which is, in a way, "between" RPC and
   NFSv4.1.  It is important that the session abstraction not have
   ramifications within the RPC layer.

   One such issue arises within the reconnection logic of RPC.
   Previously, an explicit session binding operation, which established
   session context for each new connection, was explored.  This however
   required that the session binding also be performed during reconnect,
   which in turn required an RPC request.  This additional request
   requires new RPC semantics, both in implementation and the fact that
   a new request is inserted into the RPC stream.  Also, the binding of
   a connection to a session required the upper layer to become "aware"
   of connections, something the RPC layer abstraction architecturally
   abstracts away.  Therefore the session binding is not handled in
   connection scope but instead explicitly carried in each request.

   For Reliability Availability and Serviceability (RAS) issues such as
   bandwidth aggregation and multipathing, clients frequently seek to
   make multiple connections through multiple logical or physical
   channels.  The session is a convenient point to aggregate and manage
   these resources.





Shepler                  Expires April 20, 2006                [Page 17]


Internet-Draft        NFS version 4 Minor Version 1         October 2005


5.2.5.  Server Duplicate Request Cache

   Server duplicate request caches, while not a part of an NFS protocol,
   have become a standard, even required, part of any NFS
   implementation.  First described in [CJ89], the duplicate request
   cache was initially found to reduce work at the server by avoiding
   duplicate processing for retransmitted requests.  A second, and in
   the long run more important benefit, was improved correctness, as the
   cache avoided certain destructive non-idempotent requests from being
   reinvoked.

   However, such caches do not provide correctness guarantees; they
   cannot be managed in a reliable, persistent fashion.  The reason is
   understandable - their storage requirement is unbounded due to the
   lack of any such bound in the NFS protocol, and they are dependent on
   transport addresses for request matching.

   As proposed in this draft, the presence of maximum request count
   limits and negotiated maximum sizes allows the size and duration of
   the cache to be bounded, and coupled with a long-lived session
   identifier, enables its persistent storage on a per-session basis.

   This provides a single unified mechanism which provides the following
   guarantees required in the NFSv4 specification, while extending them
   to all requests, rather than limiting them only to a subset of state-
   related requests:

   "It is critical the server maintain the last response sent to the
   client to provide a more reliable cache of duplicate non- idempotent
   requests than that of the traditional cache described in [CJ89]..."
   [RFC3530]

   The maximum request count limit is the count of active operations,
   which bounds the number of entries in the cache.  Constraining the
   size of operations additionally serves to limit the required storage
   to the product of the current maximum request count and the maximum
   response size.  This storage requirement enables server- side
   efficiencies.

   Session negotiation allows the server to maintain other state.  An
   NFSv4.1 client invoking the session destroy operation will cause the
   server to denegotiate (close) the session, allowing the server to
   deallocate cache entries.  Clients can potentially specify that such
   caches not be kept for appropriate types of sessions (for example,
   read-only sessions).  This can enable more efficient server operation
   resulting in improved response times, and more efficient sizing of
   buffers and response caches.




Shepler                  Expires April 20, 2006                [Page 18]


Internet-Draft        NFS version 4 Minor Version 1         October 2005


   Similarly, it is important for the client to explicitly learn whether
   the server is able to implement reliable semantics.  Knowledge of
   whether these semantics are in force is critical for a highly
   reliable client, one which must provide transactional integrity
   guarantees.  When clients request that the semantics be enabled for a
   given session, the session reply must inform the client if the mode
   is in fact enabled.  In this way the client can confidently proceed
   with operations without having to implement consistency facilities of
   its own.

5.3.  Session Initialization and Transfer Models

   Session initialization issues, and data transfer models relevant to
   both TCP and RDMA are discussed in this section.

5.3.1.  Session Negotiation

   The following parameters are exchanged between client and server at
   session creation time.  Their values allow the server to properly
   size resources allocated in order to service the client's requests,
   and to provide the server with a way to communicate limits to the
   client for proper and optimal operation.  They are exchanged prior to
   all session-related activity, over any transport type.  Discussion of
   their use is found in their descriptions as well as throughout this
   section.

   Maximum Requests

      The client's desired maximum number of concurrent requests is
      passed, in order to allow the server to size its reply cache
      storage.  The server may modify the client's requested limit
      downward (or upward) to match its local policy and/or resources.
      Over RDMA-capable RPC transports, the per-request management of
      low-level transport message credits is handled within the RPC
      layer.  [RPCRDMA]

   Maximum Request/Response Sizes

      The maximum request and response sizes are exchanged in order to
      permit allocation of appropriately sized buffers and request cache
      entries.  The size must allow for certain protocol minima,
      allowing the receipt of maximally sized operations (e.g.  RENAME
      requests which contains two name strings).  Note the maximum
      request/response sizes cover the entire request/response message
      and not simply the data payload as traditional NFS maximum read or
      write size.  Also note the server implementation may not, in fact
      probably does not, require the reply cache entries to be sized as
      large as the maximum response.  The server may reduce the client's



Shepler                  Expires April 20, 2006                [Page 19]


Internet-Draft        NFS version 4 Minor Version 1         October 2005


      requested sizes.

   Inline Padding/Alignment

      The server can inform the client of any padding which can be used
      to deliver NFSv4 inline WRITE payloads into aligned buffers.  Such
      alignment can be used to avoid data copy operations at the server
      for both TCP and inline RDMA transfers.  For RDMA, the client
      informs the server in each operation when padding has been
      applied.  [RPCRDMA]

   Transport Attributes

      A placeholder for transport-specific attributes is provided, with
      a format to be determined.  Possible examples of information to be
      passed in this parameter include transport security attributes to
      be used on the connection, RDMA- specific attributes, legacy
      "private data" as used on existing RDMA fabrics, transport Quality
      of Service attributes, etc.  This information is to be passed to
      the peer's transport layer by local means which is currently
      outside the scope of this draft, however one attribute is provided
      in the RDMA case:

   RDMA Read Resources

      RDMA implementations must explicitly provision resources to
      support RDMA Read requests from connected peers.  These values
      must be explicitly specified, to provide adequate resources for
      matching the peer's expected needs and the connection's delay-
      bandwidth parameters.  The client provides its chosen value to the
      server in the initial session creation, the value must be provided
      in each client RDMA endpoint.  The values are asymmetric and
      should be set to zero at the server in order to conserve RDMA
      resources, since clients do not issue RDMA Read operations in this
      proposal.  The result is communicated in the session response, to
      permit matching of values across the connection.  The value may
      not be changed in the duration of the session, although a new
      value may be requested as part of a new session.

5.3.2.  RDMA Requirements

   A complete discussion of the operation of RPC-based protocols atop
   RDMA transports is in [RPCRDMA].  Where RDMA is considered, this
   proposal assumes the use of such a layering; it addresses only the
   upper layer issues relevant to making best use of RPC/RDMA.

   A connection oriented (reliable sequenced) RDMA transport will be
   required.  There are several reasons for this.  First, this model



Shepler                  Expires April 20, 2006                [Page 20]


Internet-Draft        NFS version 4 Minor Version 1         October 2005


   most closely reflects the general NFSv4 requirement of long-lived and
   congestion-controlled transports.  Second, to operate correctly over
   either an unreliable or unsequenced RDMA transport, or both, would
   require significant complexity in the implementation and protocol not
   appropriate for a strict minor version.  For example, retransmission
   on connected endpoints is explicitly disallowed in the current NFSv4
   draft; it would again be required with these alternate transport
   characteristics.  Third, the proposal assumes a specific RDMA
   ordering semantic, which presents the same set of ordering and
   reliability issues to the RDMA layer over such transports.

   The RDMA implementation provides for making connections to other
   RDMA-capable peers.  In the case of the current proposals before the
   RDDP working group, these RDMA connections are preceded by a
   "streaming" phase, where ordinary TCP (or NFS) traffic might flow.
   However, this is not assumed here and sizes and other parameters are
   explicitly exchanged upon a session entering RDMA mode.

5.3.3.  RDMA Connection Resources

   On transport endpoints which support automatic RDMA mode, that is,
   endpoints which are created in the RDMA-enabled state, a single,
   preposted buffer must initially be provided by both peers, and the
   client session negotiation must be the first exchange.

   On transport endpoints supporting dynamic negotiation, a more
   sophisticated negotiation is possible, but is not discussed in the
   current draft.

   RDMA imposes several requirements on upper layer consumers.
   Registration of memory and the need to post buffers of a specific
   size and number for receive operations are a primary consideration.

   Registration of memory can be a relatively high-overhead operation,
   since it requires pinning of buffers, assignment of attributes (e.g.
   readable/writable), and initialization of hardware translation.
   Preregistration is desirable to reduce overhead.  These registrations
   are specific to hardware interfaces and even to RDMA connection
   endpoints, therefore negotiation of their limits is desirable to
   manage resources effectively.

   Following the basic registration, these buffers must be posted by the
   RPC layer to handle receives.  These buffers remain in use by the
   RPC/NFSv4 implementation; the size and number of them must be known
   to the remote peer in order to avoid RDMA errors which would cause a
   fatal error on the RDMA connection.

   The session provides a natural way for the server to manage resource



Shepler                  Expires April 20, 2006                [Page 21]


Internet-Draft        NFS version 4 Minor Version 1         October 2005


   allocation to each client rather than to each transport connection
   itself.  This enables considerable flexibility in the administration
   of transport endpoints.

5.3.4.  TCP and RDMA Inline Transfer Model

   The basic transfer model for both TCP and RDMA is referred to as
   "inline".  For TCP, this is the only transfer model supported, since
   TCP carries both the RPC header and data together in the data stream.

   For RDMA, the RDMA Send transfer model is used for all NFS requests
   and replies, but data is optionally carried by RDMA Writes or RDMA
   Reads.  Use of Sends is required to ensure consistency of data and to
   deliver completion notifications.  The pure-Send method is typically
   used where the data payload is small, or where for whatever reason
   target memory for RDMA is not available.

        Inline message exchange

               Client                                Server
                  :                Request              :
             Send :   ------------------------------>   : untagged
                  :                                     :  buffer
                  :               Response              :
         untagged :   <------------------------------   : Send
          buffer  :                                     :


               Client                                Server
                  :            Read request             :
             Send :   ------------------------------>   : untagged
                  :                                     :  buffer
                  :       Read response with data       :
         untagged :   <------------------------------   : Send
          buffer  :                                     :


               Client                                Server
                  :       Write request with data       :
             Send :   ------------------------------>   : untagged
                  :                                     :  buffer
                  :            Write response           :
         untagged :   <------------------------------   : Send
          buffer  :                                     :

   Responses must be sent to the client on the same connection that the
   request was sent.  It is important that the server does not assume
   any specific client implementation, in particular whether connections



Shepler                  Expires April 20, 2006                [Page 22]


Internet-Draft        NFS version 4 Minor Version 1         October 2005


   within a session share any state at the client.  This is also
   important to preserve ordering of RDMA operations, and especially
   RMDA consistency.  Additionally, it ensures that the RPC RDMA layer
   makes no requirement of the RDMA provider to open its memory
   registration handles (Steering Tags) beyond the scope of a single
   RDMA connection.  This is an important security consideration.

   Two values must be known to each peer prior to issuing Sends: the
   maximum number of sends which may be posted, and their maximum size.
   These values are referred to, respectively, as the message credits
   and the maximum message size.  While the message credits might vary
   dynamically over the duration of the session, the maximum message
   size does not.  The server must commit to preserving this number of
   duplicate request cache entires, and preparing a number of receive
   buffers equal to or greater than its currently advertised credit
   value, each of the advertised size.  These ensure that transport
   resources are allocated sufficient to receive the full advertised
   limits.

   Note that the server must post the maximum number of session requests
   to each client operations channel.  The client is not required to
   spread its requests in any particular fashion across connections
   within a session.  If the client wishes, it may create multiple
   sessions, each with a single or small number of operations channels
   to provide the server with this resource advantage.  Or, over RDMA
   the server may employ a "shared receive queue".  The server can in
   any case protect its resources by restricting the client's request
   credits.

   While tempting to consider, it is not possible to use the TCP window
   as an RDMA operation flow control mechanism.  First, to do so would
   violate layering, requiring both senders to be aware of the existing
   TCP outbound window at all times.  Second, since requests are of
   variable size, the TCP window can hold a widely variable number of
   them, and since it cannot be reduced without actually receiving data,
   the receiver cannot limit the sender.  Third, any middlebox
   interposing on the connection would wreck any possible scheme.
   [MIDTAX] In this proposal, maximum request count limits are exchanged
   at the session level to allow correct provisioning of receive buffers
   by transports.

   When operating over TCP or other similar transport, request limits
   and sizes are still employed in NFSv4.1, but instead of being
   required for correctness, they provide the basis for efficient server
   implementation of the duplicate request cache.  The limits are chosen
   based upon the expected needs and capabilities of the client and
   server, and are in fact arbitrary.  Sizes may be specified by the
   client as zero (requesting the server's preferred or optimal value),



Shepler                  Expires April 20, 2006                [Page 23]


Internet-Draft        NFS version 4 Minor Version 1         October 2005


   and request limits may be chosen in proportion to the client's
   capabilities.  For example, a limit of 1000 allows 1000 requests to
   be in progress, which may generally be far more than adequate to keep
   local networks and servers fully utilized.

   Both client and server have independent sizes and buffering, but over
   RDMA fabrics client credits are easily managed by posting a receive
   buffer prior to sending each request.  Each such buffer may not be
   completed with the corresponding reply, since responses from NFSv4
   servers arrive in arbitrary order.  When an operations channel is
   also used for callbacks, the client must account for callback
   requests by posting additional buffers.  Note that implementation-
   specific facilities such as a shared receive queue may also allow
   optimization of these allocations.

   When a session is created, the client requests a preferred buffer
   size, and the server provides its answer.  The server posts all
   buffers of at least this size.  The client must comply by not sending
   requests greater than this size.  It is recommended that server
   implementations do all they can to accommodate a useful range of
   possible client requests.  There is a provision in [RPCRDMA] to allow
   the sending of client requests which exceed the server's receive
   buffer size, but it requires the server to "pull" the client's
   request as a "read chunk" via RDMA Read.  This introduces at least
   one additional network roundtrip, plus other overhead such as
   registering memory for RDMA Read at the client and additional RDMA
   operations at the server, and is to be avoided.

   An issue therefore arises when considering the NFSv4 COMPOUND
   procedures.  Since an arbitrary number (total size) of operations can
   be specified in a single COMPOUND procedure, its size is effectively
   unbounded.  This cannot be supported by RDMA Sends, and therefore
   this size negotiation places a restriction on the construction and
   maximum size of both COMPOUND requests and responses.  If a COMPOUND
   results in a reply at the server that is larger than can be sent in
   an RDMA Send to the client, then the COMPOUND must terminate and the
   operation which causes the overflow will provide a TOOSMALL error
   status result.

5.3.5.  RDMA Direct Transfer Model

   Placement of data by explicitly tagged RDMA operations is referred to
   as "direct" transfer.  This method is typically used where the data
   payload is relatively large, that is, when RDMA setup has been
   performed prior to the operation, or when any overhead for setting up
   and performing the transfer is regained by avoiding the overhead of
   processing an ordinary receive.




Shepler                  Expires April 20, 2006                [Page 24]


Internet-Draft        NFS version 4 Minor Version 1         October 2005


   The client advertises RDMA buffers in this proposed model, and not
   the server.  This means the "XDR Decoding with Read Chunks" described
   in [RPCRDMA] is not employed by NFSv4.1 replies, and instead all
   results transferred via RDMA to the client employ "XDR Decoding with
   Write Chunks".  There are several reasons for this.

   First, it allows for a correct and secure mode of transfer.  The
   client may advertise specific memory buffers only during specific
   times, and may revoke access when it pleases.  The server is not
   required to expose copies of local file buffers for individual
   clients, or to lock or copy them for each client access.

   Second, client credits based on fixed-size request buffers are easily
   managed on the server, but for the server additional management of
   buffers for client RDMA Reads is not well-bounded.  For example, the
   client may not perform these RDMA Read operations in a timely
   fashion, therefore the server would have to protect itself against
   denial-of-service on these resources.

   Third, it reduces network traffic, since buffer exposure outside the
   scope and duration of a single request/response exchange necessitates
   additional memory management exchanges.

   There are costs associated with this decision.  Primary among them is
   the need for the server to employ RDMA Read for operations such as
   large WRITE.  The RDMA Read operation is a two-way exchange at the
   RDMA layer, which incurs additional overhead relative to RDMA Write.
   Additionally, RDMA Read requires resources at the data source (the
   client in this proposal) to maintain state and to generate replies.
   These costs are overcome through use of pipelining with credits, with
   sufficient RDMA Read resources negotiated at session initiation, and
   appropriate use of RDMA for writes by the client - for example only
   for transfers above a certain size.

   A description of which NFSv4 operation results are eligible for data
   transfer via RDMA Write is in [NFSDDP].  There are only two such
   operations: READ and READLINK.  When XDR encoding these requests on
   an RDMA transport, the NFSv4.1 client must insert the appropriate
   xdr_write_list entries to indicate to the server whether the results
   should be transferred via RDMA or inline with a Send.  As described
   in [NFSDDP], a zero-length write chunk is used to indicate an inline
   result.  In this way, it is unnecessary to create new operations for
   RDMA-mode versions of READ and READLINK.

   Another tool to avoid creation of new, RDMA-mode operations is the
   Reply Chunk [RPCRDMA], which is used by RPC in RDMA mode to return
   large replies via RDMA as if they were inline.  Reply chunks are used
   for operations such as READDIR, which returns large amounts of



Shepler                  Expires April 20, 2006                [Page 25]


Internet-Draft        NFS version 4 Minor Version 1         October 2005


   information, but in many small XDR segments.  Reply chunks are
   offered by the client and the server can use them in preference to
   inline.  Reply chunks are transparent to upper layers such as NFSv4.

   In any very rare cases where another NFSv4.1 operation requires
   larger buffers than were negotiated when the session was created (for
   example extraordinarily large RENAMEs), the underlying RPC layer may
   support the use of "Message as an RDMA Read Chunk" and "RDMA Write of
   Long Replies" as described in [RPCRDMA].  No additional support is
   required in the NFSv4.1 client for this.  The client should be
   certain that its requested buffer sizes are not so small as to make
   this a frequent occurrence, however.

   All operations are initiated by a Send, and are completed with a
   Send.  This is exactly as in conventional NFSv4, but under RDMA has a
   significant purpose: RDMA operations are not complete, that is,
   guaranteed consistent, at the data sink until followed by a
   successful Send completion (i.e. a receive).  These events provide a
   natural opportunity for the initiator (client) to enable and later
   disable RDMA access to the memory which is the target of each
   operation, in order to provide for consistent and secure operation.
   The RDMAP Send with Invalidate operation may be worth employing in
   this respect, as it relieves the client of certain overhead in this
   case.

   A "onetime" boolean advisory to each RDMA region might become a hint
   to the server that the client will use the three-tuple for only one
   NFSv4 operation.  For a transport such as iWARP, the server can
   assist the client in invalidating the three-tuple by performing a
   Send with Solicited Event and Invalidate.  The server may ignore this
   hint, in which case the client must perform a local invalidate after
   receiving the indication from the server that the NFSv4 operation is
   complete.  This may be considered in a future version of this draft
   and [NFSDDP].

   In a trusted environment, it may be desirable for the client to
   persistently enable RDMA access by the server.  Such a model is
   desirable for the highest level of efficiency and lowest overhead.













Shepler                  Expires April 20, 2006                [Page 26]


Internet-Draft        NFS version 4 Minor Version 1         October 2005


        RDMA message exchanges

               Client                                Server
                  :         Direct Read Request         :
             Send :   ------------------------------>   : untagged
                  :                                     :  buffer
                  :               Segment               :
          tagged  :   <------------------------------   :  RDMA Write
          buffer  :                  :                  :
                  :              [Segment]              :
          tagged  :   <------------------------------   : [RDMA Write]
          buffer  :                                     :
                  :         Direct Read Response        :
         untagged :   <------------------------------   :  Send (w/Inv.)
          buffer  :                                     :






               Client                                Server
                  :        Direct Write Request         :
             Send :   ------------------------------>   : untagged
                  :                                     :  buffer
                  :               Segment               :
          tagged  :   v------------------------------   :  RDMA Read
          buffer  :   +----------------------------->   :
                  :                  :                  :
                  :              [Segment]              :
          tagged  :   v------------------------------   : [RDMA Read]
          buffer  :   +----------------------------->   :
                  :                                     :
                  :        Direct Write Response        :
         untagged :   <------------------------------   :  Send (w/Inv.)
          buffer  :                                     :

5.4.  Connection Models

   There are three scenarios in which to discuss the connection model.
   Each will be discussed individually, after describing the common case
   encountered at initial connection establishment.

   After a successful connection, the first request proceeds, in the
   case of a new client association, to initial session creation, and
   then optionally to session callback channel binding, prior to regular
   operation.




Shepler                  Expires April 20, 2006                [Page 27]


Internet-Draft        NFS version 4 Minor Version 1         October 2005


   Commonly, each new client "mount" will be the action which drives
   creation of a new session.  However there are any number of other
   approaches.  Clients may choose to share a single connection and
   session among all their mount points.  Or, clients may support
   trunking, where additional connections are created but all within a
   single session.  Alternatively, the client may choose to create
   multiple sessions, each tuned to the buffering and reliability needs
   of the mount point.  For example, a readonly mount can sharply reduce
   its write buffering and also makes no requirement for the server to
   support reliable duplicate request caching.

   Similarly, the client can choose among several strategies for
   clientid usage.  Sessions can share a single clientid, or create new
   clientids as the client deems appropriate.  For kernel-based clients
   which service multiple authenticated users, a single clientid shared
   across all mount points is generally the most appropriate and
   flexible approach.  For example, all the client's file operations may
   wish to share locking state and the local client kernel takes the
   responsibility for arbitrating access locally.  For clients choosing
   to support other authentication models, perhaps example userspace
   implementations, a new clientid is indicated.  Through use of session
   create options, both models are supported at the client's choice.

   Since the session is explicitly created and destroyed by the client,
   and each client is uniquely identified, the server may be
   specifically instructed to discard unneeded presistent state.  For
   this reason, it is possible that a server will retain any previous
   state indefinitely, and place its destruction under administrative
   control.  Or, a server may choose to retain state for some
   configurable period, provided that the period meets other NFSv4
   requirements such as lease reclamation time, etc.  However, since
   discarding this state at the server may affect the correctness of the
   server as seen by the client across network partitioning, such
   discarding of state should be done only in a conservative manner.

   Each client request to the server carries a new SEQUENCE operation
   within each COMPOUND, which provides the session context.  This
   session context then governs the request control, duplicate request
   caching, and other persistent parameters managed by the server for a
   session.

5.4.1.  TCP Connection Model

   The following is a schematic diagram of the NFSv4.1 protocol
   exchanges leading up to normal operation on a TCP stream.






Shepler                  Expires April 20, 2006                [Page 28]


Internet-Draft        NFS version 4 Minor Version 1         October 2005


               Client                                Server
          TCPmode :   Create Clientid(nfs_client_id4)   : TCPmode
                  :   ------------------------------>   :
                  :                                     :
                  :     Clientid reply(clientid, ...)   :
                  :   <------------------------------   :
                  :                                     :
                  :   Create Session(clientid, size S,  :
                  :      maxreq N, STREAM, ...)         :
                  :   ------------------------------>   :
                  :                                     :
                  :   Session reply(sessionid, size S', :
                  :      maxreq N')                     :
                  :   <------------------------------   :
                  :                                     :
                  :          <normal operation>         :
                  :   ------------------------------>   :
                  :   <------------------------------   :
                  :                  :                  :

   No net additional exchange is added to the initial negotiation by
   this proposal.  In the NFSv4.1 exchange, the CREATECLIENTID replaces
   SETCLIENTID (eliding the callback "clientaddr4" addressing) and
   CREATESESSION subsumes the function of SETCLIENTID_CONFIRM, as
   described elsewhere in this document.  Callback channel binding is
   optional, as in NFSv4.0.  Note that the STREAM transport type is
   shown above, but since the transport mode remains unchanged and
   transport attributes are not necessarily exchanged, DEFAULT could
   also be passed.

5.4.2.  Negotiated RDMA Connection Model

   One possible design which has been considered is to have a
   "negotiated" RDMA connection model, supported via use of a session
   bind operation as a required first step.  However due to issues
   mentioned earlier, this proved problematic.  This section remains as
   a reminder of that fact, and it is possible such a mode can be
   supported.

   It is not considered critical that this be supported for two reasons.
   One, the session persistence provides a way for the server to
   remember important session parameters, such as sizes and maximum
   request counts.  These values can be used to restore the endpoint
   prior to making the first reply.  Two, there are currently no
   critical RDMA parameters to set in the endpoint at the server side of
   the connection.  RDMA Read resources, which are in general not
   settable after entering RDMA mode, are set only at the client - the
   originator of the connection.  Therefore as long as the RDMA provider



Shepler                  Expires April 20, 2006                [Page 29]


Internet-Draft        NFS version 4 Minor Version 1         October 2005


   supports an automatic RDMA connection mode, no further support is
   required from the NFSv4.1 protocol for reconnection.

   Note, the client must provide at least as many RDMA Read resources to
   its local queue for the benefit of the server when reconnecting, as
   it used when negotiating the session.  If this value is no longer
   appropriate, the client should resynchronize its session state,
   destroy the existing session, and start over with the more
   appropriate values.

5.4.3.  Automatic RDMA Connection Model

   The following is a schematic diagram of the NFSv4.1 protocol
   exchanges performed on an RDMA connection.

             Client                                Server
       RDMAmode :                  :                  : RDMAmode
                :                  :                  :
       Prepost  :                  :                  : Prepost
       receive  :                  :                  : receive
                :                                     :
                :   Create Clientid(nfs_client_id4)   :
                :   ------------------------------>   :
                :                                     : Prepost
                :     Clientid reply(clientid, ...)   : receive
                :   <------------------------------   :
       Prepost  :                                     :
       receive  :   Create Session(clientid, size S,  :
                :      maxreq N, RDMA ...)            :
                :   ------------------------------>   :
                :                                     : Prepost <=N'
                :   Session reply(sessionid, size S', :     receives of
                :      maxreq N')                     :     size S'
                :   <------------------------------   :
                :                                     :
                :          <normal operation>         :
                :   ------------------------------>   :
                :   <------------------------------   :
                :                  :                  :

5.5.  Buffer Management, Transfer, Flow Control

   Inline operations in NFSv4.1 behave effectively the same as TCP
   sends.  Procedure results are passed in a single message, and its
   completion at the client signal the receiving process to inspect the
   message.

   RDMA operations are performed solely by the server in this proposal,



Shepler                  Expires April 20, 2006                [Page 30]


Internet-Draft        NFS version 4 Minor Version 1         October 2005


   as described in the previous "RDMA Direct Model" section.  Since
   server RDMA operations do not result in a completion at the client,
   and due to ordering rules in RDMA transports, after all required RDMA
   operations are complete, a Send (Send with Solicited Event for iWARP)
   containing the procedure results is performed from server to client.
   This Send operation will result in a completion which will signal the
   client to inspect the message.

   In the case of client read-type NFSv4 operations, the server will
   have issued RDMA Writes to transfer the resulting data into client-
   advertised buffers.  The subsequent Send operation performs two
   necessary functions: finalizing any active or pending DMA at the
   client, and signaling the client to inspect the message.

   In the case of client write-type NFSv4 operations, the server will
   have issued RDMA Reads to fetch the data from the client-advertised
   buffers.  No data consistency issues arise at the client, but the
   completion of the transfer must be acknowledged, again by a Send from
   server to client.

   In either case, the client advertises buffers for direct (RDMA style)
   operations.  The client may desire certain advertisement limits, and
   may wish the server to perform remote invalidation on its behalf when
   the server has completed its RDMA.  This may be considered in a
   future version of this draft.

   In the absence of remote invalidation, the client may perform its
   own, local invalidation after the operation completes.  This
   invalidation should occur prior to any RPCSEC GSS integrity checking,
   since a validly remotely accessible buffer can possibly be modified
   by the peer.  However, after invalidation and the contents integrity
   checked, the contents are locally secure.

   Credit updates over RDMA transports are supported at the RPC layer as
   described in [RPCRDMA].  In each request, the client requests a
   desired number of credits to be made available to the connection on
   which it sends the request.  The client must not send more requests
   than the number which the server has previously advertised, or in the
   case of the first request, only one.  If the client exceeds its
   credit limit, the connection may close with a fatal RDMA error.

   The server then executes the request, and replies with an updated
   credit count accompanying its results.  Since replies are sequenced
   by their RDMA Send order, the most recent results always reflect the
   server's limit.  In this way the client will always know the maximum
   number of requests it may safely post.

   Because the client requests an arbitrary credit count in each



Shepler                  Expires April 20, 2006                [Page 31]


Internet-Draft        NFS version 4 Minor Version 1         October 2005


   request, it is relatively easy for the client to request more, or
   fewer, credits to match its expected need.  A client that discovered
   itself frequently queuing outgoing requests due to lack of server
   credits might increase its requested credits proportionately in
   response.  Or, a client might have a simple, configurable number.
   The protocol also provides a per-operation "maxslot" exchange to
   assist in dynamic adjustment at the session level, described in a
   later section.

   Occasionally, a server may wish to reduce the total number of credits
   it offers a certain client on a connection.  This could be
   encountered if a client were found to be consuming its credits
   slowly, or not at all.  A client might notice this itself, and reduce
   its requested credits in advance, for instance requesting only the
   count of operations it currently has queued, plus a few as a base for
   starting up again.  Such mechanisms can, however, be potentially
   complicated and are implementation-defined.  The protocol does not
   require them.

   Because of the way in which RDMA fabrics function, it is not possible
   for the server (or client back channel) to cancel outstanding receive
   operations.  Therefore, effectively only one credit can be withdrawn
   per receive completion.  The server (or client back channel) would
   simply not replenish a receive operation when replying.  The server
   can still reduce the available credit advertisement in its replies to
   the target value it desires, as a hint to the client that its credit
   target is lower and it should expect it to be reduced accordingly.
   Of course, even if the server could cancel outstanding receives, it
   cannot do so, since the client may have already sent requests in
   expectation of the previous limit.

   This brings out an interesting scenario similar to the client
   reconnect discussed earlier in "Connection Models".  How does the
   server reduce the credits of an inactive client?

   One approach is for the server to simply close such a connection and
   require the client to reconnect at a new credit limit.  This is
   acceptable, if inefficient, when the connection setup time is short
   and where the server supports persistent session semantics.

   A better approach is to provide a back channel request to return the
   operations channel credits.  The server may request the client to
   return some number of credits, the client must comply by performing
   operations on the operations channel, provided of course that the
   request does not drop the client's credit count to zero (in which
   case the connection would deadlock).  If the client finds that it has
   no requests with which to consume the credits it was previously
   granted, it must send zero-length Send RDMA operations, or NULL NFSv4



Shepler                  Expires April 20, 2006                [Page 32]


Internet-Draft        NFS version 4 Minor Version 1         October 2005


   operations in order to return the resources to the server.  If the
   client fails to comply in a timely fashion, the server can recover
   the resources by breaking the connection.

   While in principle, the back channel credits could be subject to a
   similar resource adjustment, in practice this is not an issue, since
   the back channel is used purely for control and is expected to be
   statically provisioned.

   It is important to note that in addition to maximum request counts,
   the sizes of buffers are negotiated per-session.  This permits the
   most efficient allocation of resources on both peers.  There is an
   important requirement on reconnection: the sizes posted by the server
   at reconnect must be at least as large as previously used, to allow
   recovery.  Any replies that are replayed from the server's duplicate
   request cache must be able to be received into client buffers.  In
   the case where a client has received replies to all its retried
   requests (and therefore received all its expected responses), then
   the client may disconnect and reconnect with different buffers at
   will, since no cache replay will be required.

5.6.  Retry and Replay

   NFSv4.0 forbids retransmission on active connections over reliable
   transports; this includes connected-mode RDMA.  This restriction must
   be maintained in NFSv4.1.

   If one peer were to retransmit a request (or reply), it would consume
   an additional credit on the other.  If the server retransmitted a
   reply, it would certainly result in an RDMA connection loss, since
   the client would typically only post a single receive buffer for each
   request.  If the client retransmitted a request, the additional
   credit consumed on the server might lead to RDMA connection failure
   unless the client accounted for it and decreased its available
   credit, leading to wasted resources.

   RDMA credits present a new issue to the duplicate request cache in
   NFSv4.1.  The request cache may be used when a connection within a
   session is lost, such as after the client reconnects.  Credit
   information is a dynamic property of the connection, and stale values
   must not be replayed from the cache.  This implies that the request
   cache contents must not be blindly used when replies are issued from
   it, and credit information appropriate to the channel must be
   refreshed by the RPC layer.

   Finally, RDMA fabrics do not guarantee that the memory handles
   (Steering Tags) within each rdma three-tuple are valid on a scope
   outside that of a single connection.  Therefore, handles used by the



Shepler                  Expires April 20, 2006                [Page 33]


Internet-Draft        NFS version 4 Minor Version 1         October 2005


   direct operations become invalid after connection loss.  The server
   must ensure that any RDMA operations which must be replayed from the
   request cache use the newly provided handle(s) from the most recent
   request.

5.7.  The Back Channel

   The NFSv4 callback operations present a significant resource problem
   for the RDMA enabled client.  Clearly, callbacks must be negotiated
   in the way credits are for the ordinary operations channel for
   requests flowing from client to server.  But, for callbacks to arrive
   on the same RDMA endpoint as operation replies would require
   dedicating additional resources, and specialized demultiplexing and
   event handling.  Or, callbacks may not require RDMA sevice at all
   (they do not normally carry substantial data payloads).  It is highly
   desirable to streamline this critical path via a second
   communications channel.

   The session callback channel binding facility is designed for exactly
   such a situation, by dynamically associating a new connected endpoint
   with the session, and separately negotiating sizes and counts for
   active callback channel operations.  The binding operation is
   firewall-friendly since it does not require the server to initiate
   the connection.

   This same method serves as well for ordinary TCP connection mode.  It
   is expected that all NFSv4.1 clients may make use of the session
   facility to streamline their design.

   The back channel functions exactly the same as the operations channel
   except that no RDMA operations are required to perform transfers,
   instead the sizes are required to be sufficiently large to carry all
   data inline, and of course the client and server reverse their roles
   with respect to which is in control of credit management.  The same
   rules apply for all transfers, with the server being required to flow
   control its callback requests.

   The back channel is optional.  If not bound on a given session, the
   server must not issue callback operations to the client.  This in
   turn implies that such a client must never put itself in the
   situation where the server will need to do so, lest the client lose
   its connection by force, or its operation be incorrect.  For the same
   reason, if a back channel is bound, the client is subject to
   revocation of its delegations if the back channel is lost.  Any
   connection loss should be corrected by the client as soon as
   possible.

   This can be convenient for the NFSv4.1 client; if the client expects



Shepler                  Expires April 20, 2006                [Page 34]


Internet-Draft        NFS version 4 Minor Version 1         October 2005


   to make no use of back channel facilities such as delegations, then
   there is no need to create it.  This may save significant resources
   and complexity at the client.

   For these reasons, if the client wishes to use the back channel, that
   channel must be bound first, before using the operations channel.  In
   this way, the server will not find itself in a position where it will
   send callbacks on the operations channel when the client is not
   prepared for them.

   There is one special case, that where the back channel is bound in
   fact to the operations channel's connection.  This configuration
   would be used normally over a TCP stream connection to exactly
   implement the NFSv4.0 behavior, but over RDMA would require complex
   resource and event management at both sides of the connection.  The
   server is not required to accept such a bind request on an RDMA
   connection for this reason, though it is recommended.

5.8.  COMPOUND Sizing Issues

   Very large responses may pose duplicate request cache issues.  Since
   servers will want to bound the storage required for such a cache, the
   unlimited size of response data in COMPOUND may be troublesome.  If
   COMPOUND is used in all its generality, then the inclusion of certain
   non-idempotent operations within a single COMPOUND request may render
   the entire request non-idempotent.  (For example, a single COMPOUND
   request which read a file or symbolic link, then removed it, would be
   obliged to cache the data in order to allow identical replay).
   Therefore, many requests might include operations that return any
   amount of data.

   It is not satisfactory for the server to reject COMPOUNDs at will
   with NFS4ERR_RESOURCE when they pose such difficulties for the
   server, as this results in serious interoperability problems.
   Instead, any such limits must be explicitly exposed as attributes of
   the session, ensuring that the server can explicitly support any
   duplicate request cache needs at all times.

5.9.  Data Alignment

   A negotiated data alignment enables certain scatter/gather
   optimizations.  A facility for this is supported by [RPCRDMA].  Where
   NFS file data is the payload, specific optimizations become highly
   attractive.

   Header padding is requested by each peer at session initiation, and
   may be zero (no padding).  Padding leverages the useful property that
   RDMA receives preserve alignment of data, even when they are placed



Shepler                  Expires April 20, 2006                [Page 35]


Internet-Draft        NFS version 4 Minor Version 1         October 2005


   into anonymous (untagged) buffers.  If requested, client inline
   writes will insert appropriate pad bytes within the request header to
   align the data payload on the specified boundary.  The client is
   encouraged to be optimistic and simply pad all WRITEs within the RPC
   layer to the negotiated size, in the expectation that the server can
   use them efficiently.

   It is highly recommended that clients offer to pad headers to an
   appropriate size.  Most servers can make good use of such padding,
   which allows them to chain receive buffers in such a way that any
   data carried by client requests will be placed into appropriate
   buffers at the server, ready for filesystem processing.  The
   receiver's RPC layer encounters no overhead from skipping over pad
   bytes, and the RDMA layer's high performance makes the insertion and
   transmission of padding on the sender a significant optimization.  In
   this way, the need for servers to perform RDMA Read to satisfy all
   but the largest client writes is obviated.  An added benefit is the
   reduction of message roundtrips on the network - a potentially good
   trade, where latency is present.

   The value to choose for padding is subject to a number of criteria.
   A primary source of variable-length data in the RPC header is the
   authentication information, the form of which is client-determined,
   possibly in response to server specification.  The contents of
   COMPOUNDs, sizes of strings such as those passed to RENAME, etc. all
   go into the determination of a maximal NFSv4 request size and
   therefore minimal buffer size.  The client must select its offered
   value carefully, so as not to overburden the server, and vice- versa.
   The payoff of an appropriate padding value is higher performance.

                    Sender gather:
        |RPC Request|Pad bytes|Length| -> |User data...|
        \------+---------------------/       \
                \                             \
                 \    Receiver scatter:        \-----------+- ...
            /-----+----------------\            \           \
            |RPC Request|Pad|Length|   ->  |FS buffer|->|FS buffer|->...

   In the above case, the server may recycle unused buffers to the next
   posted receive if unused by the actual received request, or may pass
   the now-complete buffers by reference for normal write processing.
   For a server which can make use of it, this removes any need for data
   copies of incoming data, without resorting to complicated end-to-end
   buffer advertisement and management.  This includes most kernel-based
   and integrated server designs, among many others.  The client may
   perform similar optimizations, if desired.

   Padding is negotiated by the session creation operation, and



Shepler                  Expires April 20, 2006                [Page 36]


Internet-Draft        NFS version 4 Minor Version 1         October 2005


   subsequently used by the RPC RDMA layer, as described in [RPCRDMA].

5.10.  NFSv4 Integration

   The following section discusses the integration of the proposed RDMA
   extensions with NFSv4.0.

5.10.1.  Minor Versioning

   Minor versioning is the existing facility to extend the NFSv4
   protocol, and this proposal takes that approach.

   Minor versioning of NFSv4 is relatively restrictive, and allows for
   tightly limited changes only.  In particular, it does not permit
   adding new "procedures" (it permits adding only new "operations").
   Interoperability concerns make it impossible to consider additional
   layering to be a minor revision.  This somewhat limits the changes
   that can be proposed when considering extensions.

   To support the duplicate request cache integrated with sessions and
   request control, it is desirable to tag each request with an
   identifier to be called a Slotid.  This identifier must be passed by
   NFSv4 when running atop any transport, including traditional TCP.
   Therefore it is not desirable to add the Slotid to a new RPC
   transport, even though such a transport is indicated for support of
   RDMA.  This draft and [RPCRDMA] do not propose such an approach.

   Instead, this proposal conforms to the requirements of NFSv4 minor
   versioning, through the use of a new operation within NFSv4 COMPOUND
   procedures as detailed below.

   If sessions are in use for a given clientid, this same clientid
   cannot be used for non-session NFSv4 operation, including NFSv4.0.
   Because the server will have allocated session-specific state to the
   active clientid, it would be an unnecessary burden on the server
   implementor to support and account for additional, non- session
   traffic, in addition to being of no benefit.  Therefore this proposal
   prohibits a single clientid from doing this.  Nevertheless, employing
   a new clientid for such traffic is supported.

5.10.2.  Slot Identifiers and Server Duplicate Request Cache

   The presence of deterministic maximum request limits on a session
   enables in-progress requests to be assigned unique values with useful
   properties.

   The RPC layer provides a transaction ID (xid), which, while required
   to be unique, is not especially convenient for tracking requests.



Shepler                  Expires April 20, 2006                [Page 37]


Internet-Draft        NFS version 4 Minor Version 1         October 2005


   The transaction ID is only meaningful to the issuer (client), it
   cannot be interpreted at the server except to test for equality with
   previously issued requests.  Because RPC operations may be completed
   by the server in any order, many transaction IDs may be outstanding
   at any time.  The client may therefore perform a computationally
   expensive lookup operation in the process of demultiplexing each
   reply.

   In the proposal, there is a limit to the number of active requests.
   This immediately enables a convenient, computationally efficient
   index for each request which is designated as a Slot Identifier, or
   slotid.

   When the client issues a new request, it selects a slotid in the
   range 0..N-1, where N is the server's current "totalrequests" limit
   granted the client on the session over which the request is to be
   issued.  The slotid must be unused by any of the requests which the
   client has already active on the session.  "Unused" here means the
   client has no outstanding request for that slotid.  Because the slot
   id is always an integer in the range 0..N-1, client implementations
   can use the slotid from a server response to efficiently match
   responses with outstanding requests, such as, for example, by using
   the slotid to index into a outstanding request array.  This can be
   used to avoid expensive hashing and lookup functions in the
   performace-critical receive path.

   The sequenceid, which accompanies the slotid in each request, is
   important for a second, important check at the server: it must be
   able to be determined efficiently whether a request using a certain
   slotid is a retransmit or a new, never-before-seen request.  It is
   not feasible for the client to assert that it is retransmitting to
   implement this, because for any given request the client cannot know
   the server has seen it unless the server actually replies.  Of
   course, if the client has seen the server's reply, the client would
   not retransmit!

   The sequenceid must increase monotonically for each new transmit of a
   given slotid, and must remain unchanged for any retransmission.  The
   server must in turn compare each newly received request's sequenceid
   with the last one previously received for that slotid, to see if the
   new request is:

      A new request, in which the sequenceid is greater than that
      previously seen in the slot (accounting for sequence wraparound).
      The server proceeds to execute the new request.

      A retransmitted request, in which the sequenceid is equal to that
      last seen in the slot.  Note that this request may be either



Shepler                  Expires April 20, 2006                [Page 38]


Internet-Draft        NFS version 4 Minor Version 1         October 2005


      complete, or in progress.  The server performs replay processing
      in these cases.

      A misordered duplicate, in which the sequenceid is less than that
      previously seen in the slot.  The server must drop the incoming
      request, which may imply dropping the connection if the transport
      is reliable, as dictated by section 3.1.1 of [RFC3530].

   This last condition is possible on any connection, not just
   unreliable, unordered transports.  Delayed behavior on abandoned TCP
   connections which are not yet closed at the server, or pathological
   client implementations can cause it, among other causes.  Therefore,
   the server may wish to harden itself against certain repeated
   occurrences of this, as it would for retransmissions in [RFC3530].

   It is recommended, though not necessary for protocol correctness,
   that the client simply increment the sequenceid by one for each new
   request on each slotid.  This reduces the wraparound window to a
   minimum, and is useful for tracing and avoidance of possible
   implementation errors.

   The client may however, for implementation-specific reasons, choose a
   different algorithm.  For example it might maintain a single sequence
   space for all slots in the session - e.g. employing the RPC XID
   itself.  The sequenceid, in any case, is never interpreted by the
   server for anything but to test by comparison with previously seen
   values.

   The server may thereby use the slotid, in conjunction with the
   sessionid and sequenceid, within the SEQUENCE portion of the request
   to maintain its duplicate request cache (DRC) for the session, as
   opposed to the traditional approach of ONC RPC applications that use
   the XID along with certain transport information [RW96].

   Unlike the XID, the slotid is always within a specific range; this
   has two implications.  The first implication is that for a given
   session, the server need only cache the results of a limited number
   of COMPOUND requests.  The second implication derives from the first,
   which is unlike XID-indexed DRCs, the slotid DRC by its nature cannot
   be overflowed.  Through use of the sequenceid to identify
   retransmitted requests, it is notable that the server does not need
   to actually cache the request itself, reducing the storage
   requirements of the DRC further.  These new facilities makes it
   practical to maintain all the required entries for an effective DRC.

   The slotid and sequenceid therefore take over the traditional role of
   the port number in the server DRC implementation, and the session
   replaces the IP address.  This approach is considerably more portable



Shepler                  Expires April 20, 2006                [Page 39]


Internet-Draft        NFS version 4 Minor Version 1         October 2005


   and completely robust - it is not subject to the frequent
   reassignment of ports as clients reconnect over IP networks.  In
   addition, the RPC XID is not used in the reply cache, enhancing
   robustness of the cache in the face of any rapid reuse of XIDs by the
   client.

   It is required to encode the slotid information into each request in
   a way that does not violate the minor versioning rules of the NFSv4.0
   specification.  This is accomplished here by encoding it in a control
   operation within each NFSv4.1 COMPOUND and CB_COMPOUND procedure.
   The operation easily piggybacks within existing messages.  The
   implementation section of this document describes the specific
   proposal.

   In general, the receipt of a new sequenced request arriving on any
   valid slot is an indication that the previous DRC contents of that
   slot may be discarded.  In order to further assist the server in slot
   management, the client is required to use the lowest available slot
   when issuing a new request.  In this way, the server may be able to
   retire additional entries.

   However, in the case where the server is actively adjusting its
   granted maximum request count to the client, it may not be able to
   use receipt of the slotid to retire cache entries.  The slotid used
   in an incoming request may not reflect the server's current idea of
   the client's session limit, because the request may have been sent
   from the client before the update was received.  Therefore, in the
   downward adjustment case, the server may have to retain a number of
   duplicate request cache entries at least as large as the old value,
   until operation sequencing rules allow it to infer that the client
   has seen its reply.

   The SEQUENCE (and CB_SEQUENCE) operation also carries a "maxslot"
   value which carries additional client slot usage information.  The
   client must always provide its highest-numbered outstanding slot
   value in the maxslot argument, and the server may reply with a new
   recognized value.  The client should in all cases provide the most
   conservative value possible, although it can be increased somewhat
   above the actual instantaneous usage to maintain some minimum or
   optimal level.  This provides a way for the client to yield unused
   request slots back to the server, which in turn can use the
   information to reallocate resources.  Obviously, maxslot can never be
   zero, or the session would deadlock.

   The server also provides a target maxslot value to the client, which
   is an indication to the client of the maxslot the server wishes the
   client to be using.  This permits the server to withdraw (or add)
   resources from a client that has been found to not be using them, in



Shepler                  Expires April 20, 2006                [Page 40]


Internet-Draft        NFS version 4 Minor Version 1         October 2005


   order to more fairly share resources among a varying level of demand
   from other clients.  The client must always comply with the server's
   value updates, since they indicate newly established hard limits on
   the client's access to session resources.  However, because of
   request pipelining, the client may have active requests in flight
   reflecting prior values, therefore the server must not immediately
   require the client to comply.

   It is worthwhile to note that Sprite RPC [BW87] defined a "channel"
   which in some ways is similar to the slotid proposed here.  Sprite
   RPC used channels to implement parallel request processing and
   request/response cache retirement.

5.10.3.  COMPOUND and CB_COMPOUND

   Support for per-operation control can be piggybacked onto NFSv4
   COMPOUNDs with full transparency, by placing such facilities into
   their own, new operation, and placing this operation first in each
   COMPOUND under the new NFSv4 minor protocol revision.  The contents
   of the operation would then apply to the entire COMPOUND.

   Recall that the NFSv4 minor revision is contained within the COMPOUND
   header, encoded prior to the COMPOUNDed operations.  By simply
   requiring that the new operation always be contained in NFSv4 minor
   COMPOUNDs, the control protocol can piggyback perfectly with each
   request and response.

   In this way, the NFSv4 RDMA Extensions may stay in compliance with
   the minor versioning requirements specified in section 10 of
   [RFC3530].

   Referring to section 13.1 of the same document, the proposed session-
   enabled COMPOUND and CB_COMPOUND have the form:

      +-----+--------------+-----------+------------+-----------+----
      | tag | minorversion | numops    | control op | op + args | ...
      |     |   (== 1)     | (limited) |  + args    |           |
      +-----+--------------+-----------+------------+-----------+----

      and the reply's structure is:

      +------------+-----+--------+-------------------------------+--//
      |last status | tag | numres | status + control op + results |  //
      +------------+-----+--------+-------------------------------+--//
              //-----------------------+----
              // status + op + results | ...
              //-----------------------+----




Shepler                  Expires April 20, 2006                [Page 41]


Internet-Draft        NFS version 4 Minor Version 1         October 2005


   The single control operation within each NFSv4.1 COMPOUND defines the
   context and operational session parameters which govern that COMPOUND
   request and reply.  Placing it first in the COMPOUND encoding is
   required in order to allow its processing before other operations in
   the COMPOUND.

5.10.4.  eXternal Data Representation Efficiency

   RDMA is a copy avoidance technology, and it is important to maintain
   this efficiency when decoding received messages.  Traditional XDR
   implementations frequently use generated unmarshaling code to convert
   objects to local form, incurring a data copy in the process (in
   addition to subjecting the caller to recursive calls, etc).  Often,
   such conversions are carried out even when no size or byte order
   conversion is necessary.

   It is recommended that implementations pay close attention to the
   details of memory referencing in such code.  It is far more efficient
   to inspect data in place, using native facilities to deal with word
   size and byte order conversion into registers or local variables,
   rather than formally (and blindly) performing the operation via
   fetch, reallocate and store.

   Of particular concern is the result of the READDIR operation, in
   which such encoding abounds.

5.10.5.  Effect of Sessions on Existing Operations

   The use of a session replaces the use of the SETCLIENTID and
   SETCLIENTID_CONFIRM operations, and allows certain simplification of
   the RENEW and callback addressing mechanisms in the base protocol.

   The cb_program and cb_location which are obtained by the server in
   SETCLIENTID_CONFIRM must not be used by the server, because the
   NFSv4.1 client performs callback channel designation with
   BIND_BACKCHANNEL.  Therefore the SETCLIENTID and SETCLIENTID_CONFIRM
   operations becomes obsolete when sessions are in use, and a server
   should return an error to NFSv4.1 clients which might issue either
   operation.

   Another favorable result of the session is that the server is able to
   avoid requiring the client to perform OPEN_CONFIRM operations.  The
   existence of a reliable and effective DRC means that the server will
   be able to determine whether an OPEN request carrying a previously
   known open_owner from a client is or is not a retransmission.
   Because of this, the server no longer requires OPEN_CONFIRM to verify
   whether the client is retransmitting an open request.  This in turn
   eliminates the server's reason for requesting OPEN_CONFIRM - the



Shepler                  Expires April 20, 2006                [Page 42]


Internet-Draft        NFS version 4 Minor Version 1         October 2005


   server can simply replace any previous information on this
   open_owner.  Client OPEN operations are therefore streamlined,
   reducing overhead and latency through avoiding the additional
   OPEN_CONFIRM exchange.

   Since the session carries the client liveness indication with it
   implicitly, any request on a session associated with a given client
   will renew that client's leases.  Therefore the RENEW operation is
   made unnecessary when a session is present, as any request (including
   a SEQUENCE operation with or without additional NFSv4 operations)
   performs its function.  It is possible (though this proposal does not
   make any recommendation) that the RENEW operation could be made
   obsolete.

   An interesting issue arises however if an error occurs on such a
   SEQUENCE operation.  If the SEQUENCE operation fails, perhaps due to
   an invalid slotid or other non-renewal-based issue, the server may or
   may not have performed the RENEW.  In this case, the state of any
   renewal is undefined, and the client should make no assumption that
   it has been performed.  In practice, this should not occur but even
   if it did, it is expected the client would perform some sort of
   recovery which would result in a new, successful, SEQUENCE operation
   being run and the client assured that the renewal took place.

5.10.6.  Authentication Efficiencies

   NFSv4 requires the use of the RPCSEC_GSS ONC RPC security flavor
   [RFC2203] to provide authentication, integrity, and privacy via
   cryptography.  The server dictates to the client the use of
   RPCSEC_GSS, the service (authentication, integrity, or privacy), and
   the specific GSS-API security mechanism that each remote procedure
   call and result will use.

   If the connection's integrity is protected by an additional means
   than RPCSEC_GSS, such as via IPsec, then the use of RPCSEC_GSS's
   integrity service is nearly redundant (See the Security
   Considerations section for more explanation of why it is "nearly" and
   not completely redundant).  Likewise, if the connection's privacy is
   protected by additional means, then the use of both RPCSEC_GSS's
   integrity and privacy services is nearly redundant.

   Connection protection schemes, such as IPsec, are more likely to be
   implemented in hardware than upper layer protocols like RPCSEC_GSS.
   Hardware-based cryptography at the IPsec layer will be more efficient
   than software-based cryptography at the RPCSEC_GSS layer.

   When transport integrity can be obtained, it is possible for server
   and client to downgrade their per-operation authentication, after an



Shepler                  Expires April 20, 2006                [Page 43]


Internet-Draft        NFS version 4 Minor Version 1         October 2005


   appropriate exchange.  This downgrade can in fact be as complete as
   to establish security mechanisms that have zero cryptographic
   overhead, effectively using the underlying integrity and privacy
   services provided by transport.

   Based on the above observations, a new GSS-API mechanism, called the
   Channel Conjunction Mechanism [CCM], is being defined.  The CCM works
   by creating a GSS-API security context using as input a cookie that
   the initiator and target have previously agreed to be a handle for
   GSS-API context created previously over another GSS-API mechanism.

   NFSv4.1 clients and servers should support CCM and they must use as
   the cookie the handle from a successful RPCSEC_GSS context creation
   over a non-CCM mechanism (such as Kerberos V5).  The value of the
   cookie will be equal to the handle field of the rpc_gss_init_res
   structure from the RPCSEC_GSS specification.

   The [CCM] Draft provides further discussion and examples.

5.11.  Sessions Security Considerations

   The NFSv4 minor version 1 retains all of existing NFSv4 security; all
   security considerations present in NFSv4.0 apply to it equally.

   Security considerations of any underlying RDMA transport are
   additionally important, all the more so due to the emerging nature of
   such transports.  Examining these issues is outside the scope of this
   draft.

   When protecting a connection with RPCSEC_GSS, all data in each
   request and response (whether transferred inline or via RDMA)
   continues to receive this protection over RDMA fabrics [RPCRDMA].
   However when performing data transfers via RDMA, RPCSEC_GSS
   protection of the data transfer portion works against the efficiency
   which RDMA is typically employed to achieve.  This is because such
   data is normally managed solely by the RDMA fabric, and intentionally
   is not touched by software.  Therefore when employing RPCSEC_GSS
   under CCM, and where integrity protection has been "downgraded", the
   cooperation of the RDMA transport provider is critical to maintain
   any integrity and privacy otherwise in place for the session.  The
   means by which the local RPCSEC_GSS implementation is integrated with
   the RDMA data protection facilities are outside the scope of this
   draft.

   It is logical to use the same GSS context on a session's callback
   channel as that used on its operations channel(s), particularly when
   the connection is shared by both.  The client must indicate to the
   server:



Shepler                  Expires April 20, 2006                [Page 44]


Internet-Draft        NFS version 4 Minor Version 1         October 2005


   - what security flavor(s) to use in the call back.  A special
   callback flavor might be defined for this.

   - if the flavor is RPCSEC_GSS, then the client must have previously
   created an RPCSEC_GSS session with the server.  The client offers to
   the server the the opaque handle<> value from the rpc_gss_init_res
   structure, the window size of RPCSEC_GSS sequence numbers, and an
   opaque gss_cb_handle.

   This exchange can be performed as part of session and clientid
   creation, and the issue warrants careful analysis before being
   specified.

   If the NFS client wishes to maintain full control over RPCSEC_GSS
   protection, it may still perform its transfer operations using either
   the inline or RDMA transfer model, or of course employ traditional
   TCP stream operation.  In the RDMA inline case, header padding is
   recommended to optimize behavior at the server.  At the client, close
   attention should be paid to the implementation of RPCSEC_GSS
   processing to minimize memory referencing and especially copying.
   These are well-advised in any case!

   The proposed session callback channel binding improves security over
   that provided by NFSv4 for the callback channel.  The connection is
   client-initiated, and subject to the same firewall and routing checks
   as the operations channel.  The connection cannot be hijacked by an
   attacker who connects to the client port prior to the intended
   server.  The connection is set up by the client with its desired
   attributes, such as optionally securing with IPsec or similar.  The
   binding is fully authenticated before being activated.

5.11.1.  Authentication

   Proper authentication of the principal which issues any session and
   clientid in the proposed NFSv4.1 operations exactly follows the
   similar requirement on client identifiers in NFSv4.0.  It must not be
   possible for a client to impersonate another by guessing its session
   identifiers for NFSv4.1 operations, nor to bind a callback channel to
   an existing session.  To protect against this, NFSv4.0 requires
   appropriate authentication and matching of the principal used.  This
   is discussed in Section 16, Security Considerations of [RFC3530].
   The same requirement when using a session identifier applies to
   NFSv4.1 here.

   Going beyond NFSv4.0, the presence of a session associated with any
   clientid may also be used to enhance NFSv4.1 security with respect to
   client impersonation.  In NFSv4.0, there are many operations which
   carry no clientid, including in particular those which employ a



Shepler                  Expires April 20, 2006                [Page 45]


Internet-Draft        NFS version 4 Minor Version 1         October 2005


   stateid argument.  A rogue client which wished to carry out a denial
   of service attack on another client could perform CLOSE, DELEGRETURN,
   etc operations with that client's current filehandle, sequenceid and
   stateid, after having obtained them from eavesdropping or other
   approach.  Locking and open downgrade operations could be similarly
   attacked.

   When an NFSv4.1 session is in place for any clientid, countermeasures
   are easily applied through use of authentication by the server.
   Because the clientid and sessionid must be present in each request
   within a session, the server may verify that the clientid is in fact
   originating from a principal with the appropriate authenticated
   credentials, that the sessionid belongs to the clientid, and that the
   stateid is valid in these contexts.  This is in general not possible
   with the affected operations in NFSv4.0 due to the fact that the
   clientid is not present in the requests.

   In the event that authentication information is not available in the
   incoming request, for example after a reconnection when the security
   was previously downgraded using CCM, the server must require the
   client re-establish the authentication in order that the server may
   validate the other client-provided context, prior to executing any
   operation.  The sessionid, present in the newly retransmitted
   request, combined with the retransmission detection enabled by the
   NFSv4.1 duplicate request cache, are a convenient and reliable
   context for the server to use for this contingency.

   The server should take care to protect itself against denial of
   service attacks in the creation of sessions and clientids.  Clients
   who connect and create sessions, only to disconnect and never use
   them may leave significant state behind.  (The same issue applies to
   NFSv4.0 with clients who may perform SETCLIENTID, then never perform
   SETCLIENTID_CONFIRM.)  Careful authentication coupled with resource
   checks is highly recommended.

















Shepler                  Expires April 20, 2006                [Page 46]


Internet-Draft        NFS version 4 Minor Version 1         October 2005


6.  Directory Delegations

6.1.  Introduction to Directory Delegations

   The major addition to NFS version 4 in the area of caching is the
   ability of the server to delegate certain responsibilities to the
   client.  When the server grants a delegation for a file to a client,
   the client receives certain semantics with respect to the sharing of
   that file with other clients.  At OPEN, the server may provide the
   client either a read or write delegation for the file.  If the client
   is granted a read delegation, it is assured that no other client has
   the ability to write to the file for the duration of the delegation.
   If the client is granted a write delegation, the client is assured
   that no other client has read or write access to the file.  This
   reduces network traffic and server load by allowing the client to
   perform certain operations on local file data and can also provide
   stronger consistency for the local data.

   Directory caching for the NFS version 4 protocol is similar to
   previous versions.  Clients typically cache directory information for
   a duration determined by the client.  At the end of a predefined
   timeout, the client will query the server to see if the directory has
   been updated.  By caching attributes, clients reduce the number of
   GETATTR calls made to the server to validate attributes.
   Furthermore, frequently accessed files and directories, such as the
   current working directory, have their attributes cached on the client
   so that some NFS operations can be performed without having to make
   an RPC call.  By caching name and inode information about most
   recently looked up entries in DNLC (Directory Name Lookup Cache),
   clients do not need to send LOOKUP calls to the server every time
   these files are accessed.

   This caching approach works reasonably well at reducing network
   traffic in many environments.  However, it does not address
   environments where there are numerous queries for files that do not
   exist.  In these cases of "misses", the client must make RPC calls to
   the server in order to provide reasonable application semantics and
   promptly detect the creation of new directory entries.  Examples of
   high miss activity are compilation in software development
   environments.  The current behavior of NFS limits its potential
   scalability and wide-area sharing effectiveness in these types of
   environments.  Other distributed stateful filesystem architectures
   such as AFS and DFS have proven that adding state around directory
   contents can greatly reduce network traffic in high miss
   environments.

   Delegation of directory contents is proposed as an extension for
   NFSv4.  Such an extension would provide similar traffic reduction



Shepler                  Expires April 20, 2006                [Page 47]


Internet-Draft        NFS version 4 Minor Version 1         October 2005


   benefits as with file delegations.  By allowing clients to cache
   directory contents (in a read-only fashion) while being notified of
   changes, the client can avoid making frequent requests to interrogate
   the contents of slowly-changing directories, reducing network traffic
   and improving client performance.

   These extensions allow improved namespace cache consistency to be
   achieved through delegations and synchronous recalls alone without
   asking for notifications.  In addition, if time-based consistency is
   sufficient, asynchronous notifications can provide performance
   benefits for the client, and possibly the server, under some common
   operating conditions such as slowly-changing and/or very large
   directories.

6.2.  Directory Delegation Design (in brief)

   A new operation GET_DIR_DELEGATION is used by the client to ask for a
   directory delegation.  The delegation covers directory attributes and
   all entries in the directory.  If either of these change the
   delegation will be recalled synchronously.  The operation causing the
   recall will have to wait before the recall is complete.  Any changes
   to directory entry attributes will not cause the delegation to be
   recalled.

   In addition to asking for delegations, a client can also ask for
   notifications for certain events.  These events include changes to
   directory attributes and/or its contents.  If a client asks for
   notification for a certain event, the server will notify the client
   when that event occurs.  This will not result in the delegation being
   recalled for that client.  The notifications are asynchronous and
   provide a way of avoiding recalls in situations where a directory is
   changing enough that the pure recall model may not be effective while
   trying to allow the client to get substantial benefit.  In the
   absence of notifications, once the delegation is recalled the client
   has to refresh its directory cache which might not be very efficient
   for very large directories.

   The delegation is read only and the client may not make changes to
   the directory other than by performing NFSv4 operations that modify
   the directory or the associated file attributes so that the server
   has knowledge of these changes.  In order to keep the client
   namespace in sync with the server, the server will notify the client
   holding the delegation of the changes made as a result.  This is to
   avoid any subsequent GETATTR or READDIR calls to the server.  If a
   client holding the delegation makes any changes to the directory, the
   delegation will not be recalled.

   Delegations can be recalled by the server at any time.  Normally, the



Shepler                  Expires April 20, 2006                [Page 48]


Internet-Draft        NFS version 4 Minor Version 1         October 2005


   server will recall the delegation when the directory changes in a way
   that is not covered by the notification, or when the directory
   changes and notifications have not been requested.

   Also if the server notices that handing out a delegation for a
   directory is causing too many notifications to be sent out, it may
   decide not to hand out a delegation for that directory or recall
   existing delegations.  If another client removes the directory for
   which a delegation has been granted, the server will recall the
   delegation.

   Both the notification and recall operations need a callback path to
   exist between the client and server.  If the callback path does not
   exist, then delegation can not be granted.  Note that with the
   session extensions [talpey] that should not be an issue.  In the
   absense of sessions, the server will have to establish a callback
   path to the client to send callbacks.

6.3.  Recommended Attributes in support of Directory Delegations

   supp_dir_attr_notice - notification delays on directory attributes

   supp_child_attr_notice - notification delays on child attributes

   These attributes allow the client and server to negotiate the
   frequency of notifications sent due to changes in attributes.  These
   attributes are returned as part of a GETATTR call on the directory.
   The supp_dir_attr_notice value covers all attribute changes to the
   directory and the supp_child_attr_notice covers all attribute changes
   to any child in the directory.

   These attributes are per directory.  The client needs to get these
   values by doing a GETATTR on the directory for which it wants
   notifications.  However these attributes are only required when the
   client is interested in getting attribute notifications.  For all
   other types of notifications and delegation requests without
   notifications, these attributes are not required.

   When the client calls the GET_DIR_DELEGATION operation and asks for
   attribute change notifications, it will request a notification delay
   that is within the server's supported range.  If the client violates
   what supp_attr_file_notice or supp_attr_dir_notice values are, the
   server should not commit to sending notifications for that change
   event.

   A value of zero for these attributes means the server will send the
   notification as soon as the change occurs.  It is not recommended to
   set this value to zero since that can put a lot of burden on the



Shepler                  Expires April 20, 2006                [Page 49]


Internet-Draft        NFS version 4 Minor Version 1         October 2005


   server.  A value of N means that the server will make a best effort
   guarentee that attribute notification are not delayed by more than
   that. nfstime4 values that compute to negative values are illegal.

6.4.  Delegation Recall

   The server will recall the directory delegation by sending a callback
   to the client.  It will use the same callback procedure as used for
   recalling file delegations.  The server will recall the delegation
   when the directory changes in a way that is not covered by the
   notification.  However the server will not recall the delegation if
   attributes of an entry within the directory change.  Also if the
   server notices that handing out a delegation for a directory is
   causing too many notifications to be sent out, it may decide not to
   hand out a delegation for that directory.  If another client tries to
   remove the directory for which a delegation has been granted, the
   server will recall the delegation.

   The server will recall the delegation by sending a CB_RECALL callback
   to the client.  If the recall is done because of a directory changing
   event, the request making that change will need to wait while the
   client returns the delegation.

6.5.  Delegation Recovery

   Crash recovery has two main goals, avoiding the necessity of breaking
   application guarantees with respect to locked files and delivery of
   updates cached at the client.  Neither of these applies to
   directories protected by read delegations and notifications.  Thus,
   the client is required to establish a new delegation on a server or
   client reboot.




















Shepler                  Expires April 20, 2006                [Page 50]


Internet-Draft        NFS version 4 Minor Version 1         October 2005


7.  NFSv4.1 Operations

7.1.  LOOKUPP - Lookup Parent Directory

   If the NFSv4 minor version is 1, then following replaces section
   14.2.14 of the NFSv4.0 specification.  The LOOKUPP operation's "over
   the wire" format is not altered, but the semantics are slightly
   modified to account for the addition of SECINFO_NO_NAME.

   SYNOPSIS



                   (cfh) -> (cfh)

   ARGUMENT



                   /* CURRENT_FH: object */
                   void;

   RESULT



                   struct LOOKUPP4res {
                           /* CURRENT_FH: directory */
                           nfsstat4        status;
                   };

   DESCRIPTION

      The current filehandle is assumed to refer to a regular directory
      or a named attribute directory.  LOOKUPP assigns the filehandle
      for its parent directory to be the current filehandle.  If there
      is no parent directory an NFS4ERR_NOENT error must be returned.
      Therefore, NFS4ERR_NOENT will be returned by the server when the
      current filehandle is at the root or top of the server's file
      tree.

      As for LOOKUP, LOOKUPP will also cross mountpoints.

      If the current filehandle is not a directory or named attribute
      directory, the error NFS4ERR_NOTDIR is returned.






Shepler                  Expires April 20, 2006                [Page 51]


Internet-Draft        NFS version 4 Minor Version 1         October 2005


      If the requester's security flavor does not match that configured
      for the parent directory, then the server SHOULD return
      NFS4ERR_WRONGSEC (a future minor revision of NFSv4 may upgrade
      this to MUST) in the LOOKUPP response.  However, if the server
      does so, it MUST support the new SECINFO_NO_NAME operation, so
      that the client can gracefully determine the correct security
      flavor.  See the discussion of the SECINFO_NO_NAME operation for a
      description.

   ERRORS

      NFS4ERR_ACCESS NFS4ERR_BADHANDLE NFS4ERR_FHEXPIRED NFS4ERR_IO
      NFS4ERR_MOVED NFS4ERR_NOENT NFS4ERR_NOFILEHANDLE NFS4ERR_NOTDIR
      NFS4ERR_RESOURCE NFS4ERR_SERVERFAULT NFS4ERR_STALE
      NFS4ERR_WRONGSEC

7.2.  SECINFO -- 33 Obtain Available Security

   If the NFSv4 minor version is 1, then following replaces section
   14.2.31 of the NFSv4.0 specification.  The SECINFO operation's "over
   the wire" format is not altered, but the semantics are slightly
   modified to account for the addition of SECINFO_NO_NAME.

   SYNOPSIS



                   (cfh), name -> { secinfo }

   ARGUMENT



                   struct SECINFO4args {
                        /* CURRENT_FH: directory */
                        component4     name;
                   };

   RESULT












Shepler                  Expires April 20, 2006                [Page 52]


Internet-Draft        NFS version 4 Minor Version 1         October 2005


                   enum rpc_gss_svc_t {/* From RFC 2203 */
                        RPC_GSS_SVC_NONE        = 1,
                        RPC_GSS_SVC_INTEGRITY   = 2,
                        RPC_GSS_SVC_PRIVACY     = 3
                   };

                   struct rpcsec_gss_info {
                        sec_oid4        oid;
                        qop4            qop;
                        rpc_gss_svc_t   service;
                   };

                   union secinfo4 switch (uint32_t flavor) {
                   case RPCSEC_GSS:
                         rpcsec_gss_info        flavor_info;
                   default:
                         void;
                   };

                   typedef secinfo4 SECINFO4resok<>;

                   union SECINFO4res switch (nfsstat4 status) {
                   case NFS4_OK:
                         SECINFO4resok resok4;
                   default:
                         void;
                   };

   DESCRIPTION

      The SECINFO operation is used by the client to obtain a list of
      valid RPC authentication flavors for a specific directory
      filehandle, file name pair.  SECINFO should apply the same access
      methodology used for LOOKUP when evaluating the name.  Therefore,
      if the requester does not have the appropriate access to LOOKUP
      the name then SECINFO must behave the same way and return
      NFS4ERR_ACCESS.

      The result will contain an array which represents the security
      mechanisms available, with an order corresponding to the server's
      preferences, the most preferred being first in the array.  The
      client is free to pick whatever security mechanism it both desires
      and supports, or to pick in the server's preference order the
      first one it supports.  The array entries are represented by the
      secinfo4 structure.  The field 'flavor' will contain a value of
      AUTH_NONE, AUTH_SYS (as defined in [RFC1831]), or RPCSEC_GSS (as
      defined in [RFC2203]).  The field flavor can also any other
      security flavor registered with IANA.



Shepler                  Expires April 20, 2006                [Page 53]


Internet-Draft        NFS version 4 Minor Version 1         October 2005


      For the flavors AUTH_NONE and AUTH_SYS, no additional security
      information is returned.  The same is true of many (if not most)
      other security flavors, including AUTH_DH.  For a return value of
      RPCSEC_GSS, a security triple is returned that contains the
      mechanism object id (as defined in [RFC2743]), the quality of
      protection (as defined in [RFC2743]) and the service type (as
      defined in [RFC2203]).  It is possible for SECINFO to return
      multiple entries with flavor equal to RPCSEC_GSS with different
      security triple values.

      On success, the current filehandle retains its value.

      If the name has a length of 0 (zero), or if name does not obey the
      UTF-8 definition, the error NFS4ERR_INVAL will be returned.

   IMPLEMENTATION

      The SECINFO operation is expected to be used by the NFS client
      when the error value of NFS4ERR_WRONGSEC is returned from another
      NFS operation.  This signifies to the client that the server's
      security policy is different from what the client is currently
      using.  At this point, the client is expected to obtain a list of
      possible security flavors and choose what best suits its policies.

      As mentioned, the server's security policies will determine when a
      client request receives NFS4ERR_WRONGSEC.  The operations which
      may receive this error are: LINK, LOOKUP, LOOKUPP, OPEN, PUTFH,
      PUTPUBFH, PUTROOTFH, RESTOREFH, RENAME, and indirectly READDIR.
      LINK and RENAME will only receive this error if the security used
      for the operation is inappropriate for saved filehandle.  With the
      exception of READDIR, these operations represent the point at
      which the client can instantiate a filehandle into the "current
      filehandle" at the server.  The filehandle is either provided by
      the client (PUTFH, PUTPUBFH, PUTROOTFH) or generated as a result
      of a name to filehandle translation (LOOKUP and OPEN).  RESTOREFH
      is different because the filehandle is a result of a previous
      SAVEFH.  Even though the filehandle, for RESTOREFH, might have
      previously passed the server's inspection for a security match,
      the server will check it again on RESTOREFH to ensure that the
      security policy has not changed.

      If the client wants to resolve an error return of
      NFS4ERR_WRONGSEC, the following will occur:



      *  For LOOKUP and OPEN, the client will use SECINFO with the same
         current filehandle and name as provided in the original LOOKUP



Shepler                  Expires April 20, 2006                [Page 54]


Internet-Draft        NFS version 4 Minor Version 1         October 2005


         or OPEN to enumerate the available security triples.

      *  For LINK, PUTFH, PUTROOTFH, PUTPUBFH, RENAME, and RESTOREFH,
         the client will use SECINFO_NO_NAME { style = current_fh }.
         The client will prefix the SECINFO_NO_NAME operation with the
         appropriate PUTFH, PUTPUBFH, or PUTROOTFH operation that
         provides the file handled originally provided by the PUTFH,
         PUTPUBFH, PUTROOTFH, or RESTOREFH, or for the failed LINK or
         RENAME, the SAVEFH.

      *  ========================================================= NOTE:
         In NFSv4.0, the client was required to use SECINFO, and had to
         reconstruct the parent of the original file handle, and the
         component name of the original filehandle.
         ========================================================

      *  For LOOKUPP, the client will use SECINFO_NO_NAME { style =
         parent } and provide the filehandle with equals the filehandle
         originally provided to LOOKUPP.

      The READDIR operation will not directly return the
      NFS4ERR_WRONGSEC error.  However, if the READDIR request included
      a request for attributes, it is possible that the READDIR
      request's security triple did not match that of a directory entry.
      If this is the case and the client has requested the rdattr_error
      attribute, the server will return the NFS4ERR_WRONGSEC error in
      rdattr_error for the entry.

      See the section "Security Considerations" for a discussion on the
      recommendations for security flavor used by SECINFO and
      SECINFO_NO_NAME.

   ERRORS



7.3.  SECINFO_NO_NAME - Get Security on Unnamed Object

   Obtain available security mechanisms with the use of the parent of an
   object or the current filehandle.

   SYNOPSIS



                   (cfh), secinfo_style -> { secinfo }





Shepler                  Expires April 20, 2006                [Page 55]


Internet-Draft        NFS version 4 Minor Version 1         October 2005


   ARGUMENT



                   enum secinfo_style_4 {
                       current_fh = 0,
                       parent = 1
                   };

                   typedef secinfo_style_4 SECINFO_NO_NAME4args;

   RESULT



                   typedef SECINFO4res SECINFO_NO_NAME4res;

   DESCRIPTION

      Like the SECINFO operation, SECINFO_NO_NAME is used by the client
      to obtain a list of valid RPC authentication flavors for a
      specific file object.  Unlike SECINFO, SECINFO_NO_NAME only works
      with objects are accessed by file handle.

      There are two styles of SECINFO_NO_NAME, as determined by the
      value of the secinfo_style_4 enumeration.  If "current_fh" is
      passed, then SECINFO_NO_NAME is querying for the required security
      for the current filehandle.  If "parent" is passed, then
      SECINFO_NO_NAME is querying for the required security of the
      current filehandles's parent.  If the style selected is "parent",
      then SECINFO should apply the same access methodology used for
      LOOKUPP when evaluating the traversal to the parent directory.
      Therefore, if the requester does not have the appropriate access
      to LOOKUPP the parent then SECINFO_NO_NAME must behave the same
      way and return NFS4ERR_ACCESS.

      Note that if PUTFH, PUTPUBFH, or PUTROOTFH return
      NFS4ERR_WRONGSEC, this is tantamount to the server asserting that
      the client will have to guess what the required security is,
      because there is no way to query.  Therefore, the client must
      iterate through the security triples available at the client and
      reattempt the PUTFH, PUTROOTFH or PUTPUBFH operation.  In the
      unfortunate event none of the MANDATORY security triples are
      supported by the client and server, the client SHOULD try using
      others that support integrity.  Failing that, the client can try
      using other forms (e.g.  AUTH_SYS and AUTH_NONE), but because such
      forms lack integrity checks, this puts the client at risk.




Shepler                  Expires April 20, 2006                [Page 56]


Internet-Draft        NFS version 4 Minor Version 1         October 2005


      The server implementor should pay particular attention to the
      section "Clarification of Security Negotiation in NFSv4.1" for
      implementation suggestions for avoiding NFS4ERR_WRONGSEC error
      returns from PUTFH, PUTROOTFH or PUTPUBFH.

      Everything else about SECINFO_NO_NAME is the same as SECINFO.  See
      the previous discussion on SECINFO.

   IMPLEMENTATION

      See the previous dicussion on SECINFO.

   ERRORS

      NFS4ERR_ACCESS NFS4ERR_BADCHAR NFS4ERR_BADHANDLE NFS4ERR_BADNAME
      NFS4ERR_BADXDR NFS4ERR_FHEXPIRED NFS4ERR_INVAL NFS4ERR_MOVED
      NFS4ERR_NAMETOOLONG NFS4ERR_NOENT NFS4ERR_NOFILEHANDLE
      NFS4ERR_NOTDIR NFS4ERR_RESOURCE NFS4ERR_SERVERFAULT NFS4ERR_STALE

7.4.  CREATECLIENTID - Instantiate Clientid

   Create a clientid

   SYNOPSIS



                   client -> clientid

   ARGUMENT



                   struct CREATECLIENTID4args {
                           nfs_client_id4  clientdesc;
                   };

   RESULT













Shepler                  Expires April 20, 2006                [Page 57]


Internet-Draft        NFS version 4 Minor Version 1         October 2005


                     struct CREATECLIENTID4resok {
                          clientid4       clientid;
                          verifier4       clientid_confirm;
                     };

                     union SETCLIENTID4res switch (nfsstat4 status) {
                     case NFS4_OK:
                           CREATECLIENTID4resok      resok4;
                     case NFS4ERR_CLID_INUSE:
                           void;
                     default:
                           void;
                     };

   DESCRIPTION

      The client uses the CREATECLIENTID operation to register a
      particular client identifier with the server.  The clientid
      returned from this operation will be necessary for requests that
      create state on the server and will serve as a parent object to
      sessions created by the client.  In order to verify the clientid
      it must first be used as an argument to CREATESESSION.

   IMPLEMENTATION

      A server's client record is a 5-tuple:



      1.  clientdesc.id:

             The long form client identifier, sent via the client.id
             subfield of the CREATECLIENTID4args structure

      2.  clientdesc.verifier:

             A client-specific value used to indicate reboots, sent via
             the clientdesc.verifier subfield of the CREATECLIENTID4args
             structure

      3.  principal:

             The RPCSEC_GSS principal sent via the RPC headers

      4.  clientid:

             The shorthand client identifier, generated by the server
             and returned via the clientid field in the



Shepler                  Expires April 20, 2006                [Page 58]


Internet-Draft        NFS version 4 Minor Version 1         October 2005


             CREATECLIENTID4resok structure

      5.  confirmed:

             A private field on the server indicating whether or not a
             client record has been confirmed.  A client record is
             confirmed if there has been a successful CREATESESSION
             operation to confirm it.  Otherwise it is unconfirmed.  An
             unconfirmed record is established by a CREATECLIENTID call.
             Any unconfirmed record that is not confirmed within a lease
             period may be removed.

      The following identifiers represent special values for the fields
      in the records.

      id_arg:

         The value of the clientdesc.id subfield of the
         CREATECLIENTID4args structure of the current request.

      verifier_arg:

         The value of the clientdesc.verifier subfield of the
         CREATECLIENTID4args structure of the current request.

      old_verifier_arg:

         A value of the clientdesc.verifier field of a client record
         received in a previous request; this is distinct from
         verifier_arg.

      principal_arg:

         The value of the RPCSEC_GSS principal for the current request.

      old_principal_arg:

         A value of the RPCSEC_GSS principal received for a previous
         request.  This is distinct from principal_arg.

      clientid_ret:

         The value of the clientid field the server will return in the
         CREATECLIENTID4resok structure for the current request.







Shepler                  Expires April 20, 2006                [Page 59]


Internet-Draft        NFS version 4 Minor Version 1         October 2005


      old_clientid_ret:

         The value of the clientid field the server returned in the
         CREATECLIENTID4resok structure for a previous request.  This is
         distinct from clientid_ret.

      Since CREATECLIENTID is a non-idempotent operation, we must
      consider the possibility that replays may occur as a result of a
      client reboot, network partition, malfunctioning router, etc.
      Replays are identified by the value of the client field of
      CREATECLIENTID4args and the method for dealing with them is
      outlined in the scenarios below.

      The scenarios are described in terms of what client records whose
      clientdesc.id subfield have value equal to id_arg exist in the
      server's set of client records.  Any cases in which there is more
      than one record with identical values for id_arg represent a
      server implementation error.  Operation in the potential valid
      cases is summarized as follows.



      1.  Common case

             If no client records with clientdesc.id matching id_arg
             exist, a new shorthand client identifier clientid_ret is
             generated, and the following unconfirmed record is added to
             the server's state.

             { id_arg, verifier_arg, principal_arg, clientid_ret, FALSE
             }

             Subsequently, the server returns clientid_ret.

      2.  Router Replay

             If the server has the following confirmed record, then this
             request is likely the result of a replayed request due to a
             faulty router or lost connection.

             { id_arg, verifier_arg, principal_arg, clientid_ret, TRUE }

             Since the record has been confirmed, the client must have
             received the server's reply from the initial CREATECLIENTID
             request.  Since this is simply a spurious request, there is
             no modification to the server's state, and the server makes
             no reply to the client.




Shepler                  Expires April 20, 2006                [Page 60]


Internet-Draft        NFS version 4 Minor Version 1         October 2005


      3.  Client Collision

             If the server has the following confirmed record, then this
             request is likely the result of a chance collision between
             the values of the clientdesc.id subfield of
             CREATECLIENTID4args for two different clients.

             { id_arg, *, old_principal_arg, clientid_ret, TRUE }

             Since the value of the clientdesc.id subfield of each
             client record must be unique, there is no modification of
             the server's state, and NFS4ERR_CLID_INUSE is returned to
             indicate the client should retry with a different value for
             the clientdesc.id subfield of CREATECLIENTID4args.

             This scenario may also represent a malicious attempt to
             destroy a client's state on the server.  For security
             reasons, the server MUST NOT remove the client's state when
             there is a principal mismatch.

      4.  Replay

             If the server has the following unconfirmed record then
             this request is likely the result of a client replay due to
             a network partition or some other connection failure.

             { id_arg, verifier_arg, principal_arg, clientid_ret, FALSE
             }

             Since the response to the CREATECLIENTID request that
             created this record may have been lost, it is not
             acceptable to drop this duplicate request.  However, rather
             than processing it normally, the existing record is left
             unchanged and clientid_ret, which was generated for the
             previous request, is returned.

      5.  Change of Principal

             If the server has the following unconfirmed record then
             this request is likely the result of a client which has for
             whatever reasons changed principals (possibly to change
             security flavor) after calling CREATECLIENTID, but before
             calling CREATESESSION.

             { id_arg, verifier_arg, old_principal_arg, clientid_ret,
             FALSE}





Shepler                  Expires April 20, 2006                [Page 61]


Internet-Draft        NFS version 4 Minor Version 1         October 2005


             Since the client has not changed, the principal field of
             the unconfirmed record is updated to principal_arg and
             clientid_ret is again returned.  There is a small
             possibility that this is merely a collision on the client
             field of CREATECLIENTID4args between unrelated clients, but
             since that is unlikely, and an unconfirmed record does not
             generally have any filesystem pertinent state, we can
             assume it is the same client without risking loss of any
             important state.

             After processing, the following record will exist on the
             server.

             { id_arg, verifier_arg, principal_arg, clientid_ret, FALSE}

      6.  Client Reboot

             If the server has the following confirmed client record,
             then this request is likely from a previously confirmed
             client which has rebooted.

             { id_arg, old_verifier_arg, principal_arg, clientid_ret,
             TRUE }

             Since the previous incarnation of the same client will no
             longer be making requests, lock and share reservations
             should be released immediately rather than forcing the new
             incarnation to wait for the lease time on the previous
             incarnation to expire.  Furthermore, session state should
             be removed since if the client had maintained that
             information across reboot, this request would not have been
             issued.  If the server does not support the
             CLAIM_DELEGATE_PREV claim type, associated delegations
             should be purged as well; otherwise, delegations are
             retained and recovery proceeds according to RFC3530.  The
             client record is updated with the new verifier and its
             status is changed to unconfirmed.

             After processing, clientid_ret is returned to the client
             and the following record will exist on the server.

             { id_arg, verifier_arg, principal_arg, clientid_ret, FALSE
             }

      7.  Reboot before confirmation

             If the server has the following unconfirmed record, then
             this request is likely from a client which rebooted before



Shepler                  Expires April 20, 2006                [Page 62]


Internet-Draft        NFS version 4 Minor Version 1         October 2005


             sending a CREATESESSION request.

             { id_arg, old_verifier_arg, *, clientid_ret, FALSE }

             Since this is believed to be a request from a new
             incarnation of the original client, the server updates the
             value of clientdesc.verifier and returns the original
             clientid_ret.  After processing, the following state exists
             on the server.

             { id_arg, verifier_arg, *, clientid_ret, FALSE }

   ERRORS

      NFS4ERR_BADXDR NFS4ERR_CLID_INUSE NFS4ERR_INVAL NFS4ERR_RESOURCE
      NFS4ERR_SERVERFAULT

7.5.  CREATESESSION - Create New Session and Confirm Clientid

   Start up session and confirm clientid.

   SYNOPSIS



                   clientid, session_args -> sessionid, session_args

   ARGUMENT























Shepler                  Expires April 20, 2006                [Page 63]


Internet-Draft        NFS version 4 Minor Version 1         October 2005


                     struct CREATESESSION4args {
                          clientid4       clientid;
                          bool            persist;
                          count4          maxrequestsize;
                          count4          maxresponsesize;
                          count4          maxrequests;
                          count4          headerpadsize;
                          switch (bool clientid_confirm) {
                           case TRUE:
                               verifier4 setclientid_confirm;
                           case FALSE:
                               void;
                          }
                          switch (channelmode4 mode) {
                           case DEFAULT:
                               void;
                           case STREAM:
                               streamchannelattrs4 streamchanattrs;
                           case RDMA:
                               rdmachannelattrs4   rdmachanattrs;
                          };
                     };

   RESULT



























Shepler                  Expires April 20, 2006                [Page 64]


Internet-Draft        NFS version 4 Minor Version 1         October 2005


                     typedef opaque sessionid4[16];

                     struct CREATESESSION4resok {
                          sessionid4      sessionid;
                          bool            persist;
                          count4          maxrequestsize;
                          count4          maxresponsesize;
                          count4          maxrequests;
                          count4          headerpadsize;
                          switch (channelmode4 mode) {
                           case DEFAULT:
                               void;
                           case STREAM:
                               streamchannelattrs4 streamchanattrs;
                           case RDMA:
                               rdmachannelattrs4   rdmachanattrs;
                          };
                     };

                     union CREATESESSION4res switch (nfsstat4 status) {
                     case NFS4_OK:
                      CREATESESSION4resok     resok4;
                     default:
                      void;
                     };

   DESCRIPTION

      This operation is used by the client to create new session objects
      on the server.  Additionally the first session created with a new
      shorthand client identifier serves to confirm the creation of that
      client's state on the server.  The server returns the parameter
      values for the new session.

   IMPLEMENTATION

      To describe the implementation, the same notation for client
      records introduced in the description of CREATECLIENTID is used
      with the following addition.

      clientid_arg: The value of the clientid field of the
      CREATESESSION4args structure of the current request.

      Since CREATESESSION is a non-idempotent operation, we must
      consider the possibility that replays may occur as a result of a
      client reboot, network partition, malfunctioning router, etc.
      Replays are identified by the value of the clientid and sessionid
      fields of CREATESESSION4args and the method for dealing with them



Shepler                  Expires April 20, 2006                [Page 65]


Internet-Draft        NFS version 4 Minor Version 1         October 2005


      is outlined in the scenarios below.

      The processing of this operation is divided into two phases:
      clientid confirmation and session creation.  In case the state for
      the provided clientid has not been verified, it is confirmed
      before the session is created.  Otherwise the clientid
      confirmation phase is skipped and only the session creation phase
      occurs.  Note that since only confirmed clients may create
      sessions, the clientid confirmation stage does not depend upon
      sessionid_arg.

      CLIENTID CONFIRMATION

      The operational cases are described in terms of what client
      records whose clientid field have value equal to clientid_arg
      exist in the server's set of client records.  Any cases in which
      there is more than one record with identical values for clientid
      represent a server implementation error.  Operation in the
      potential valid cases is summarized as follows.



      1.  Common Case

             If the server has the following unconfirmed record, then
             this is the expected confirmation of an unconfirmed record.

             { *, *, principal_arg, clientid_arg, FALSE }

             The confirmed field of the record is set to TRUE and
             processing of the operation continues normally.

      2.  Stale Clientid

             If the server contains no records with clientid equal to
             clientid_arg, then most likely the client's state has been
             purged during a period of inactivity, possibly due to a
             loss of connectivity.  NFS4ERR_STALE_CLIENTID is returned,
             and no changes are made to any client records on the
             server.

      3.  Principal Change or Collision

             If the server has the following record, then the client has
             changed principals after the previous CREATECLIENTID
             request, or there has been a chance collision between
             shortand client identifiers.




Shepler                  Expires April 20, 2006                [Page 66]


Internet-Draft        NFS version 4 Minor Version 1         October 2005


             { *, *, old_principal_arg, clientid_arg, * }

             Neither of these cases are permissible.  Processing stops
             and NFS4ERR_CLID_INUSE is returned to the client.  No
             changes are made to any client records on the server.

      SESSION CREATION

      To determine whether this request is a replay, the server examines
      the sessionid argument provided by the client.  If the sessionid
      matches the identifier of a previously created session, then this
      request must be interpreted as a replay.  No new state is created
      and a reply with the parameters of the existing session is
      returned to the client.  If a session corresponding to the
      sessionid does not already exist, then the request is not a replay
      and is processed as follows.

      NOTE: It is the responsibility of the client to generate
      appropriate values for sessionid.  Since the ordering of messages
      sent on different transport connections is not guaranteed,
      immediately reusing the sessionid of a previously destroyed
      session may yield unpredictable results.  Client implementations
      should avoid recently used sessionids to ensure correct behavior.

      The server examines the persist, maxrequestsize, maxresponsesize,
      maxrequests and headerpadsize arguments.  For each argument, if
      the value is acceptable to the server, it is recommended that the
      server use the provided value to create the new session.  If it is
      not acceptable, the server may use a different value, but must
      return the value used to the client.  These parameters have the
      following interpretation.



      persist:

         True if the client desires server support for "reliable"
         semantics.  For sessions in which only idempotent operations
         will be used (e.g. a read-only session), clients should set
         this value to false.  If the server does not or cannot provide
         "reliable" semantics this value must be set to false on return.

      maxrequestsize:

         The maximum size of a COMPOUND request that will be sent by the
         client including RPC headers.





Shepler                  Expires April 20, 2006                [Page 67]


Internet-Draft        NFS version 4 Minor Version 1         October 2005


      maxresponsesize:

         The maximum size of a COMPOUND reply that the client will
         accept from the server including RPC headers.  The server must
         not increase the value of this parameter.  If a client sends a
         COMPOUND request for which the size of the reply would exceed
         this value, the server will return NFS4ERR_RESOURCE.

      maxrequests:

         The maximum number of concurrent COMPOUND requests that the
         client will issue on the session.  Subsequent COMPOUND requests
         will each be assigned a slot identifier by the client on the
         range 0 to maxrequests - 1 inclusive.  A slot id cannot be
         reused until the previous request on that slot has completed.

      headerpadsize:

         The maximum amount of padding the client is willing to apply to
         ensure that write payloads are aligned on some boundary at the
         server.  The server should reply with its preferred value, or
         zero if padding is not in use.  The server may decrease this
         value but must not increase it.

      The server creates the session by recording the parameter values
      used and if the persist parameter is true and has been accepted by
      the server, allocating space for the duplicate request cache
      (DRC).

      If the session state is created successfully, the server
      associates it with the session identifier provided by the client.
      This identifier must be unique among the client's active sessions
      but there is no need for it to be globally unique.  Finally, the
      server returns the negotiated values used to create the session to
      the client.

   ERRORS

      NFS4ERR_BADXDR NFS4ERR_CLID_INUSE NFS4ERR_RESOURCE
      NFS4ERR_SERVERFAULT NFS4ERR_STALE_CLIENTID

7.6.  BIND_BACKCHANNEL - Create a callback channel binding

   Establish a callback channel on the connection.







Shepler                  Expires April 20, 2006                [Page 68]


Internet-Draft        NFS version 4 Minor Version 1         October 2005


   SYNOPSIS




   ARGUMENT



                     struct BIND_BACKCHANNEL4args {
                          clientid4 clientid;
                          uint32_t  callback_program;
                          uint32_t  callback_ident;
                          count4         maxrequestsize;
                          count4         maxresponsesize;
                          count4         maxrequests;
                          switch (channelmode4 mode) {
                           case DEFAULT:
                               void;
                           case STREAM:
                               streamchannelattrs4 streamchanattrs;
                           case RDMA:
                               rdmachannelattrs4   rdmachanattrs;
                          };
                     };

   RESULT
























Shepler                  Expires April 20, 2006                [Page 69]


Internet-Draft        NFS version 4 Minor Version 1         October 2005


             struct BIND_BACKCHANNEL4resok {
                  count4         maxrequestsize;
                  count4         maxresponsesize;
                  count4         maxrequests;
                  switch (channelmode4 mode) {
                   case DEFAULT:
                       void;
                   case STREAM:
                       streamchannelattrs4 streamchanattrs;
                   case RDMA:
                       rdmachannelattrs4   rdmachanattrs;
                  };
             };


             union BIND_BACKCHANNEL4res switch (nfsstat4 status) {
              case NFS4_OK:
                  BIND_BACKCHANNEL4resok   resok4;
              default:
                  void;
             };

   DESCRIPTION

      The BIND_BACKCHANNEL operation serves to establish the current
      connection as a designated callback channel for the specified
      session.  Normally, only one callback channel is bound, however if
      more than one are established, they are used at the server's
      prerogative, no affinity or preference is specified by the client.

      The arguments and results of the BIND_BACKCHANNEL call are a
      subset of the session parameters, and used identically to those
      values on the callback channel only.  However, not all session
      operation channel parameters are relevant to the callback channel,
      for example header padding (since writes of bulk data are not
      performed in callbacks).

   IMPLEMENTATION

      No discussion at this time.

   ERRORS

      TBD







Shepler                  Expires April 20, 2006                [Page 70]


Internet-Draft        NFS version 4 Minor Version 1         October 2005


7.7.  DESTROYSESSION - Destroy existing session

   Destroy existing session.

   SYNOPSIS



                   void -> status

   ARGUMENT



                   struct DESTROYSESSION4args {
                           sessionid4     sessionid;
                   };

   RESULT



                     struct SESSION_DESTROYres {
                          nfsstat status;
                      };

   DESCRIPTION

      The SESSION_DESTROY operation closes the session and discards any
      active state such as locks, leases, and server duplicate request
      cache entries.  Any remaining connections bound to the session are
      immediately unbound and may additionally be closed by the server.

      This operation must be the final, or only operation in any
      request.  Because the operation results in destruction of the
      session, any duplicate request caching for this request, as well
      as previously completed requests, will be lost.  For this reason,
      it is advisable to not place this operation in a request with
      other state-modifying operations.  In addition, a SEQUENCE
      operation is not required in the request.

      Note that because the operation will never be replayed by the
      server, a client that retransmits the request may receive an error
      in response, even though the session may have been successfully
      destroyed.






Shepler                  Expires April 20, 2006                [Page 71]


Internet-Draft        NFS version 4 Minor Version 1         October 2005


   IMPLEMENTATION

      No discussion at this time.

   ERRORS

      TBD

7.8.  SEQUENCE - Supply per-procedure sequencing and control

   Supply per-procedure sequencing and control

   SYNOPSIS



                   control -> control

   ARGUMENT



                     typedef uint32_t sequenceid4;
                     typedef uint32_t slotid4;

                     struct SEQUENCE4args {
                          clientid4 clientid;
                          sessionid4     sessionid;
                          sequenceid4    sequenceid;
                          slotid4        slotid;
                          slotid4        maxslot;
                     };

   RESULT

















Shepler                  Expires April 20, 2006                [Page 72]


Internet-Draft        NFS version 4 Minor Version 1         October 2005


                     struct SEQUENCE4resok {
                          clientid4 clientid;
                          sessionid4     sessionid;
                          sequenceid4    sequenceid;
                          slotid4        slotid;
                          slotid4        maxslot;
                          slotid4        target_maxslot;
                     };

                     union SEQUENCE4res switch (nfsstat4 status) {
                      case NFS4_OK:
                          SEQUENCE4resok resok4;
                      default:
                          void;
                     };

   DESCRIPTION

      The SEQUENCE operation is used to manage operational accounting
      for the session on which the operation is sent.  The contents
      include the client and session to which this request belongs,
      slotid and sequenceid, used by the server to implement session
      request control and the duplicate reply cache semantics, and
      exchanged slot counts which are used to adjust these values.  This
      operation must appear once as the first operation in each COMPOUND
      sent after the channel is successfully bound, or a protocol error
      must result.

   IMPLEMENTATION

      No discussion at this time.

   ERRORS

      NFS4ERR_BADSESSION NFS4ERR_BADSLOT

7.9.  CB_RECALLCREDIT - change flow control limits

   Change flow control limits

   SYNOPSIS



                   targetcount -> status






Shepler                  Expires April 20, 2006                [Page 73]


Internet-Draft        NFS version 4 Minor Version 1         October 2005


   ARGUMENT



                     struct CB_RECALLCREDIT4args {
                          sessionid4     sessionid;
                          uint32_t  target;
                     };

   RESULT



                     struct CB_RECALLCREDIT4res {
                          nfsstat4   status;
                     };

   DESCRIPTION

      The CB_RECALLCREDIT operation requests the client to return
      session and transport credits to the server, by zero-length RDMA
      Sends or NULL NFSv4 operations.

   IMPLEMENTATION

      No discussion at this time.

   ERRORS

      NONE

7.10.  CB_SEQUENCE - Supply callback channel sequencing and control

   Sequence and control

   SYNOPSIS



                   control -> control

   ARGUMENT









Shepler                  Expires April 20, 2006                [Page 74]


Internet-Draft        NFS version 4 Minor Version 1         October 2005


                     typedef uint32_t sequenceid4;
                     typedef uint32_t slotid4;

                     struct CB_SEQUENCE4args {
                          clientid4 clientid;
                          sessionid4     sessionid;
                          sequenceid4    sequenceid;
                          slotid4        slotid;
                          slotid4        maxslot;
                     };

   RESULT



                     struct CB_SEQUENCE4resok {
                          clientid4 clientid;
                          sessionid4     sessionid;
                          sequenceid4    sequenceid;
                          slotid4        slotid;
                          slotid4        maxslot;
                          slotid4        target_maxslot;
                     };

                     union CB_SEQUENCE4res switch (nfsstat4 status) {
                      case NFS4_OK:
                          CB_SEQUENCE4resok   resok4;
                      default:
                          void;
                     };

   DESCRIPTION

      The CB_SEQUENCE operation is used to manage operational accounting
      for the callback channel of the session on which the operation is
      sent.  The contents include the client and session to which this
      request belongs, slotid and sequenceid, used by the server to
      implement session request control and the duplicate reply cache
      semantics, and exchanged slot counts which are used to adjust
      these values.  This operation must appear once as the first
      operation in each CB_COMPOUND sent after the callback channel is
      successfully bound, or a protocol error must result.

   IMPLEMENTATION







Shepler                  Expires April 20, 2006                [Page 75]


Internet-Draft        NFS version 4 Minor Version 1         October 2005


      No discussion at this time.

   ERRORS

      NFS4ERR_BADSESSION NFS4ERR_BADSLOT

7.11.  GET_DIR_DELEGATION - Get a directory delegation

   Obtain a directory delegation.

   SYNOPSIS



           (cfh), requested notification -> (cfh), cookieverf, stateid,
           supported notification

   ARGUMENT



           struct GET_DIR_DELEGATION4args {
                dir_notification_type4      notification_type;
                attr_notice4                child_attr_delay;
                attr_notice4                dir_attr_delay;
           };

           /*
            * Notification types.
            */
           const DIR_NOTIFICATION_NONE                    = 0x00000000;
           const DIR_NOTIFICATION_CHANGE_CHILD_ATTRIBUTES  = 0x00000001;
           const DIR_NOTIFICATION_CHANGE_DIR_ATTRIBUTES   = 0x00000002;
           const DIR_NOTIFICATION_REMOVE_ENTRY            = 0x00000004;
           const DIR_NOTIFICATION_ADD_ENTRY               = 0x00000008;
           const DIR_NOTIFICATION_RENAME_ENTRY            = 0x00000010;
           const DIR_NOTIFICATION_CHANGE_COOKIE_VERIFIER  = 0x00000020;

           typedef uint32_t dir_notification_type4;

           typedef nfstime4 attr_notice4;

   RESULT








Shepler                  Expires April 20, 2006                [Page 76]


Internet-Draft        NFS version 4 Minor Version 1         October 2005


           struct GET_DIR_DELEGATION4resok {
                   verifier4                       cookieverf;
                  /* Stateid for get_dir_delegation */
                   stateid4                        stateid;
                  /* Which notifications can the server support */
                  dir_notification_type4          supp_notification;
                   bitmap4                         child_attributes;
                   bitmap4                         dir_attributes;
           };

           union GET_DIR_DELEGATION4res switch (nfsstat4 status) {
           case NFS4_OK:
                 /* CURRENT_FH: delegated dir */
                  GET_DIR_DELEGATION4resok      resok4;
           default:
                  void;
           };

   DESCRIPTION

      The GET_DIR_DELEGATION operation is used by a client to request a
      directory delegation.  The directory is represented by the current
      filehandle.  The client also specifies whether it wants the server
      to notify it when the directory changes in certain ways by setting
      one or more bits in a bitmap.  The server may also choose not to
      grant the delegation.  In that case the server will return
      NFS4ERR_DIRDELEG_UNAVAIL.  If the server decides to hand out the
      delegation, it will return a cookie verifier for that directory.
      If the cookie verifier changes when the client is holding the
      delegation, the delegation will be recalled unless the client has
      asked for notification for this event.  In that case a
      notification will be sent to the client.

      The server will also return a directory delegation stateid in
      addition to the cookie verifier as a result of the
      GET_DIR_DELEGATION operation.  This stateid will appear in
      callback messages related to the delegation, such as notifications
      and delegation recalls.  The client will use this stateid to
      return the delegation voluntarily or upon recall.  A delegation is
      returned by calling the DELEGRETURN operation.

      The server may not be able to support notifications of certain
      events.  If the client asks for such notifications, the server
      must inform the client of its inability to do so as part of the
      GET_DIR_DELEGATION reply by not setting the appropriate bits in
      the supported notifications bitmask contained in the reply.





Shepler                  Expires April 20, 2006                [Page 77]


Internet-Draft        NFS version 4 Minor Version 1         October 2005


      The GET_DIR_DELEGATION operation can be used for both normal and
      named attribute directories.  It covers all the entries in the
      directory except the ".." entry.  That means if a directory and
      its parent both hold directory delegations, any changes to the
      parent will not cause a notification to be sent for the child even
      though the child's ".." entry points to the parent.

   IMPLEMENTATION

      Directory delegation provides the benefit of improving cache
      consistency of namespace information.  This is done through
      synchronous callbacks.  A server must support synchronous
      callbacks in order to support directory delegations.  In addition
      to that, asynchronous notifications provide a way to reduce
      network traffic as well as improve client performance in certain
      conditions.  Notifications would not be requested when the goal is
      just cache consitency.

      Notifications are specified in terms of potential changes to the
      directory.  A client can ask to be notified whenever an entry is
      added to a directory by setting notification_type to
      DIR_NOTIFICATION_ADD_ENTRY.  It can also ask for notifications on
      entry removal, renames, directory attribute changes and cookie
      verifier changes by setting notification_type flag appropriately.
      In addition to that, the client can also ask for notifications
      upon attribute changes to children in the directory to keep its
      attribute cache up to date.  However any changes made to child
      attributes do not cause the delegation to be recalled.  If a
      client is interested in directory entry caching, or negative name
      caching, it can set the notification_type appropriately and the
      server will notify it of all changes that would otherwise
      invalidate its name cache.  The kind of notification a client asks
      for may depend on the directory size, its rate of change and the
      applications being used to access that directory.  However, the
      conditions under which a client might ask for a notification, is
      out of the scope of this specification.

      The client will set one or more bits in a bitmap
      (notification_type) to let the server know what kind of
      notification(s) it is interested in.  For attribute notifications
      it will set bits in another bitmap to indicate which attributes it
      wants to be notified of.  If the server does not support
      notifications for changes to a certain attribute, it should not
      set that attribute in the supported attribute bitmap
      (supp_notification) specified in the reply.






Shepler                  Expires April 20, 2006                [Page 78]


Internet-Draft        NFS version 4 Minor Version 1         October 2005


      In addition to that, the client will also let the server know if
      it wants to get the notification as soon as the attribute change
      occurs or after a certain delay by setting a delay factor,
      child_attr_delay for attribute changes to children and
      dir_attr_delay for attribute changes to the directory.  If this
      delay factor is set to zero, that indicates to the server that the
      client wants to be notified of any attribute changes as soon as
      they occur.  If the delay factor is set to N, the server will make
      a best effort guarantee that attribute updates are not out of sync
      by more than that.  One value covers all attribute changes for the
      directory and another value covers all attribute changes for all
      children in the directory.  If the client asks for a delay factor
      that the server does not support or that may cause significant
      resource consumption on the server by causing the server to send a
      lot of notifications, the server should not commit to sending out
      notifications for that attribute and therefore must not set the
      approprite bit in the child_attributes and dir_attributes bitmaps
      in the response.

      The server will let the client know about which notifications it
      can support by setting appropriate bits in a bitmap.  If it agrees
      to send attribute notifications, it will also set two attribute
      masks indicating which attributes it will send change
      notifications for.  One of the masks covers changes in directory
      attributes and the other covers atttribute changes to any files in
      the directory.

      The client should use a security flavor that the filesystem is
      exported with.  If it uses a different flavor, the server should
      return NFS4ERR_WRONGSEC.

   ERRORS

      NFS4ERR_ACCESS NFS4ERR_BADHANDLE NFS4ERR_BADXDR NFS4ERR_FHEXPIRED
      NFS4ERR_INVAL NFS4ERR_MOVED NFS4ERR_NOFILEHANDLE NFS4ERR_NOTDIR
      NFS4ERR_RESOURCE NFS4ERR_SERVERFAULT NFS4ERR_STALE
      NFS4ERR_DIRDELEG_UNAVAIL NFS4ERR_WRONGSEC NFS4ERR_EIO
      NFS4ERR_NOTSUPP

7.12.  CB_NOTIFY - Notify directory changes

   Tell the client of directory changes.

   SYNOPSIS







Shepler                  Expires April 20, 2006                [Page 79]


Internet-Draft        NFS version 4 Minor Version 1         October 2005




           stateid, notification -> {}

   ARGUMENT



       struct CB_NOTIFY4args {
               stateid4              stateid;
               dir_notification4     changes<>;
       };

       /*
        * Notification information sent to the client.
        */
       union dir_notification4
       switch (dir_notification_type4 notification_type) {
            case DIR_NOTIFICATION_CHANGE_CHILD_ATTRIBUTES:
                   dir_notification_attribute4 change_child_attributes;
            case DIR_NOTIFICATION_CHANGE_DIR_ATTRIBUTES:
                   fattr4                      change_dir_attributes;
            case DIR_NOTIFICATION_REMOVE_ENTRY:
                   dir_notification_remove4    remove_notification;
            case DIR_NOTIFICATION_ADD_ENTRY:
                   dir_notification_add4       add_notification;
            case DIR_NOTIFICATION_RENAME_ENTRY:
                   dir_notification_rename4    rename_notification;
            case DIR_NOTIFICATION_CHANGE_COOKIE_VERIFIER:
                   dir_notification_verifier4  verf_notification;
       };

       /*
        * Changed entry information.
        */
       struct dir_entry {
               component4      file;
               fattr4          attrs;
       };

       struct dir_notification_attribute4 {
               dir_entry    changed_entry;
       };

       struct dir_notification_remove4 {
              dir_entry      old_entry;
               nfs_cookie4    old_entry_cookie;
       };



Shepler                  Expires April 20, 2006                [Page 80]


Internet-Draft        NFS version 4 Minor Version 1         October 2005


       struct dir_notification_rename4 {
              dir_entry              old_entry;
              dir_notification_add4  new_entry;
       };

       struct dir_notification_verifier4 {
              verifier4       old_cookieverf;
              verifier4       new_cookieverf;
       };

       struct dir_notification_add4 {
              dir_entry       new_entry;
               /* what READDIR would have returned for this entry */
               nfs_cookie4     new_entry_cookie;
               bool            last_entry;
              prev_entry_info4     prev_info;
       };

       union prev_entry_info4 switch (bool isprev) {
       case TRUE:       /* A previous entry exists */
               prev_entry4 prev_entry_info;
       case FALSE:       /* we are adding to an empty
                  directory */
               void;
       };

       /*
        * Previous entry information
        */
       struct prev_entry4 {
               dir_entry       prev_entry;
               /* what READDIR returned for this entry */
               nfs_cookie4     prev_entry_cookie;
       };

   RESULT



           struct CB_NOTIFY4res {
                   nfsstat4        status;
           };

   DESCRIPTION







Shepler                  Expires April 20, 2006                [Page 81]


Internet-Draft        NFS version 4 Minor Version 1         October 2005


      The CB_NOTIFY operation is used by the server to send
      notifications to clients about changes in a delegated directory.
      These notifications are sent over the callback path.  The
      notification is sent once the original request has been processed
      on the server.  The server will send an array of notifications for
      all changes that might have occurred in the directory.  The
      dir_notification_type4 can only have one bit set for each
      notification in the array.  If the client holding the delegation
      makes any changes in the directory that cause files or sub
      directories to be added or removed, the server will notify that
      client of the resulting change(s).  If the client holding the
      delegation is making attribute or cookie verifier changes only,
      the server does not need to send notifications to that client.
      The server will send the following information for each operation:



      *  ADDING A FILE: The server will send information about the new
         entry being created along with the cookie for that entry.  The
         entry information contains the nfs name of the entry and
         attributes.  If this entry is added to the end of the
         directory, the server will set a last_entry flag to true.  If
         the file is added such that there is atleast one entry before
         it, the server will also return the previous entry information
         along with its cookie.  This is to help clients find the right
         location in their DNLC or directory caches where this entry
         should be cached.

      *  REMOVING A FILE: The server will send information about the
         directory entry being deleted.  The server will also send the
         cookie value for the deleted entry so that clients can get to
         the cached information for this entry.

      *  RENAMING A FILE: The server will send information about both
         the old entry and the new entry.  This includes name and
         attributes for each entry.  This notification is only sent if
         both entries are in the same directory.  If the rename is
         across directories, the server will send a remove notification
         to one directory and an add notification to the other
         directory, assuming both have a directory delegation.

      *  FILE/DIR ATTRIBUTE CHANGE: The client will use the attribute
         mask to inform the server of attributes for which it wants to
         receive notifications.  This change notification can be
         requested for both changes to the attributes of the directory
         as well as changes to any file attributes in the directory by
         using two separate attribute masks.  The client can not ask for
         change attribute notification per file.  One attribute mask



Shepler                  Expires April 20, 2006                [Page 82]


Internet-Draft        NFS version 4 Minor Version 1         October 2005


         covers all the files in the directory.  Upon any attribute
         change, the server will send back the values of changed
         attributes.  Notifications might not make sense for some
         filesystem wide attributes and it is up to the server to decide
         which subset it wants to support.  The client can negotiate the
         frequency of attribute notifications by letting the server know
         how often it wants to be notified of an attribute change.  The
         server will return supported notification frequencies or an
         indication that no notification is permitted for directory or
         child attributes by setting the supp_dir_attr_notice and
         supp_child_attr_notice attributes respectively.

      *  COOKIE VERIFIER CHANGE: If the cookie verifier changes while a
         client is holding a delegation, the server will notify the
         client so that it can invalidate its cookies and reissue a
         READDIR to get the new set of cookies.

   IMPLEMENTATION



   ERRORS

      NFS4ERR_BAD_STATEID NFS4ERR_INVAL NFS4ERR_BADXDR
      NFS4ERR_SERVERFAULT

7.13.  CB_RECALL_ANY - Keep any N delegations

   Notify client to return delegation and keep N of them.

   SYNOPSIS



           N -> {}

   ARGUMENT



           struct CB_RECALLANYY4args {
                   uint4          dlgs_to_keep;
           }








Shepler                  Expires April 20, 2006                [Page 83]


Internet-Draft        NFS version 4 Minor Version 1         October 2005


   RESULT



           struct CB_RECALLANY4res {
                  nfsstat4        status;
           };

   DESCRIPTION

      The server may decide that it can not hold all the delegation
      state without running out of resources.  Since the server has no
      knowledge of which delegations are being used more than others, it
      can not implement an effective reclaim scheme that avoids
      reclaiming frequently used delegations.  In that case the server
      may issue a CB_RECALL_ANY callback to the client asking it to keep
      N delegations and return the rest.  The reason why CB_RECALL_ANY
      specifies a count of delegations the client may keep as opposed to
      a count of delegations the client must yield is as follows.  Were
      it otherwise, there is a potential for a race between a
      CB_RECALL_ANY that had a count of delegations to free with a set
      of client originated operations to return delegations.  As a
      result of the race the client and server would have differing
      ideas as to how many delegations to return.  Hence the client
      could mistakenly free too many delegations.  This operation
      applies to delegations for a regular file (read or write) as well
      as for a directory.

      The client can choose to return any type of delegation as a result
      of this callback i.e. read, write or directory delegation.  The
      client can also choose to keep more delegations than what the
      server asked for and it is up to the server to handle this
      situation.  The server must give the client enough time to return
      the delegations.  This time should not be less than the lease
      period.

   IMPLEMENTATION



   ERRORS

      NFS4ERR_RESOURCE








Shepler                  Expires April 20, 2006                [Page 84]


Internet-Draft        NFS version 4 Minor Version 1         October 2005


8.  Acknowledgements

      Ackknowledgements for SECINFO

      Mike Eisler, Tom Talpey, Saadia Khan, Jon Bauman

      Acknowledgements for SESSIONS

      Tom Talpey, Jon Bauman, Spencer Shepler with input and review by
      Charles Antonelli, Brent Callaghan, Mike Eisler, John Howard, Chet
      Juszczak, Trond Myklebust, Dave Noveck, John Scott, Mike
      Stolarchuk and Mark Wittle.

      Acknowledgements for Directory Delegations

      Saadia Khan with input and review from David Noveck, Michael
      Eisler, Carl Burnett, Ted Anderson and Thomas Talpey.


































Shepler                  Expires April 20, 2006                [Page 85]


Internet-Draft        NFS version 4 Minor Version 1         October 2005


9.  Security Considerations

   To Be Completed.

10.  References

   [RFC2119]  Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
              Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.











































Shepler                  Expires April 20, 2006                [Page 86]


Internet-Draft        NFS version 4 Minor Version 1         October 2005


Author's Address

   Spencer Shepler
   Sun Microsystems, Inc.















































Shepler                  Expires April 20, 2006                [Page 87]


Internet-Draft        NFS version 4 Minor Version 1         October 2005


Intellectual Property Statement

   The IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any
   Intellectual Property Rights or other rights that might be claimed to
   pertain to the implementation or use of the technology described in
   this document or the extent to which any license under such rights
   might or might not be available; nor does it represent that it has
   made any independent effort to identify any such rights.  Information
   on the procedures with respect to rights in RFC documents can be
   found in BCP 78 and BCP 79.

   Copies of IPR disclosures made to the IETF Secretariat and any
   assurances of licenses to be made available, or the result of an
   attempt made to obtain a general license or permission for the use of
   such proprietary rights by implementers or users of this
   specification can be obtained from the IETF on-line IPR repository at
   http://www.ietf.org/ipr.

   The IETF invites any interested party to bring to its attention any
   copyrights, patents or patent applications, or other proprietary
   rights that may cover technology that may be required to implement
   this standard.  Please address the information to the IETF at
   ietf-ipr@ietf.org.


Disclaimer of Validity

   This document and the information contained herein are provided on an
   "AS IS" basis and THE CONTRIBUTOR, THE ORGANIZATION HE/SHE REPRESENTS
   OR IS SPONSORED BY (IF ANY), THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE INTERNET
   ENGINEERING TASK FORCE DISCLAIM ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED,
   INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF THE
   INFORMATION HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED
   WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.


Copyright Statement

   Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2005).  This document is subject
   to the rights, licenses and restrictions contained in BCP 78, and
   except as set forth therein, the authors retain all their rights.


Acknowledgment

   Funding for the RFC Editor function is currently provided by the
   Internet Society.




Shepler                  Expires April 20, 2006                [Page 88]


Html markup produced by rfcmarkup 1.129b, available from https://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcmarkup/