draft-ietf-nfsv4-federated-fs-reqts-05.txt   draft-ietf-nfsv4-federated-fs-reqts-06.txt 
NFSv4 Working Group J. Lentini NFSv4 Working Group J. Lentini
Internet-Draft C. Everhart Internet-Draft C. Everhart
Intended status: Informational NetApp Intended status: Informational NetApp
Expires: April 19, 2010 D. Ellard Expires: April 25, 2010 D. Ellard
BBN Technologies BBN Technologies
R. Tewari R. Tewari
M. Naik M. Naik
IBM Almaden IBM Almaden
October 16, 2009 October 22, 2009
Requirements for Federated File Systems Requirements for Federated File Systems
draft-ietf-nfsv4-federated-fs-reqts-05 draft-ietf-nfsv4-federated-fs-reqts-06
Status of this Memo Status of this Memo
This Internet-Draft is submitted to IETF in full conformance with the This Internet-Draft is submitted to IETF in full conformance with the
provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. This document may contain material provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. This document may contain material
from IETF Documents or IETF Contributions published or made publicly from IETF Documents or IETF Contributions published or made publicly
available before November 10, 2008. The person(s) controlling the available before November 10, 2008. The person(s) controlling the
copyright in some of this material may not have granted the IETF copyright in some of this material may not have granted the IETF
Trust the right to allow modifications of such material outside the Trust the right to allow modifications of such material outside the
IETF Standards Process. Without obtaining an adequate license from IETF Standards Process. Without obtaining an adequate license from
skipping to change at page 1, line 47 skipping to change at page 1, line 47
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at
http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt. http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt.
The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at
http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html. http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html.
This Internet-Draft will expire on April 19, 2010. This Internet-Draft will expire on April 25, 2010.
Copyright Notice Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2009 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the Copyright (c) 2009 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved. document authors. All rights reserved.
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents in effect on the date of Provisions Relating to IETF Documents in effect on the date of
publication of this document (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info). publication of this document (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info).
Please review these documents carefully, as they describe your rights Please review these documents carefully, as they describe your rights
and restrictions with respect to this document. and restrictions with respect to this document.
skipping to change at page 4, line 36 skipping to change at page 4, line 36
3.3. Junction Creation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 3.3. Junction Creation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
4. Glossary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 4. Glossary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
5. Proposed Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 5. Proposed Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
5.1. Basic Assumptions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 5.1. Basic Assumptions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
5.2. Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 5.2. Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
6. Non-Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 6. Non-Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
7. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 7. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
8. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 8. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
9. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 9. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
9.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 9.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
9.2. Informational References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30 9.2. Informational References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
Appendix A. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31 Appendix A. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
1. Overview 1. Overview
This document describes and lists the functional requirements of a This document describes and lists the functional requirements of a
federated file system and defines related terms. federated file system and defines related terms.
We do not describe the mechanisms that might be used to implement We do not describe the mechanisms that might be used to implement
this functionality except in cases where specific mechanisms, in our this functionality except in cases where specific mechanisms, in our
skipping to change at page 18, line 24 skipping to change at page 18, line 24
2. The FSN identifier. 2. The FSN identifier.
The FSN identifier is the index used by the NSDB node to The FSN identifier is the index used by the NSDB node to
identify the target fileset. identify the target fileset.
There are several ways to represent FSN identifiers. One There are several ways to represent FSN identifiers. One
approach could use 128-bit UUIDs as described described in approach could use 128-bit UUIDs as described described in
[RFC4122]. [RFC4122].
As an example, an FSN could be represented by a URL of the form As an example, an FSN could be represented by a URL of the form
nsdb.example.com/UUID where nsdb.example.com is the FQDN of the nsdb://nsdb.example.com/UUID where nsdb is the scheme name,
server hosting the NSDB node and UUID is the string nsdb.example.com is the FQDN of the server hosting the NSDB
representation of the identifier. node, and UUID is the string representation of the identifier.
Note that it is not assumed that it is always required for a Note that it is not assumed that it is always required for a
server to contact the NSDB node specified by the FSN in order to server to contact the NSDB node specified by the FSN in order to
find the FSLs. The relevant information stored in that NSDB find the FSLs. The relevant information stored in that NSDB
node may also be cached local to the server or on a proxy NSDB node may also be cached local to the server or on a proxy NSDB
node "near" the server. node "near" the server.
A7: All federation servers and NSDB nodes are assumed to execute the A7: All federation servers and NSDB nodes are assumed to execute the
federation protocols correctly. The behavior of the federation federation protocols correctly. The behavior of the federation
is undefined in the case of Byzantine behavior by any federation is undefined in the case of Byzantine behavior by any federation
skipping to change at page 22, line 33 skipping to change at page 22, line 33
a. It MUST be possible to query the fileserver named in an FSL a. It MUST be possible to query the fileserver named in an FSL
to discover whether a junction exists at a given path to discover whether a junction exists at a given path
within that FSL. within that FSL.
b. It MAY be possible to query the fileserver named in an FSL b. It MAY be possible to query the fileserver named in an FSL
to discover the junctions, if any, in that FSL. If this to discover the junctions, if any, in that FSL. If this
feature is implemented, the fileserver SHOULD report each feature is implemented, the fileserver SHOULD report each
junction's path within the FSL and the targeted FSN. junction's path within the FSL and the targeted FSN.
R9: The projected namespace (and the objects named by the R9: The projected namespace (and the objects named by the
namespace) MUST be accessible to clients via at least one namespace) MUST be accessible to clients via at least one of
standard filesystem access protocol. the following standard filesystem access protocols:
a. The namespace SHOULD be accessible to clients via versions a. The namespace SHOULD be accessible to clients via versions
of the CIFS (SMB) protocol. of the CIFS (SMB) protocol.
b. The namespace SHOULD be accessible to clients via the NFSv4 b. The namespace SHOULD be accessible to clients via the NFSv4
protocol as described in [RFC3530]. protocol as described in [RFC3530].
c. The namespace SHOULD be accessible to clients via the NFSv3 c. The namespace SHOULD be accessible to clients via the NFSv3
protocol as described in [RFC1813]. protocol as described in [RFC1813].
skipping to change at page 29, line 16 skipping to change at page 29, line 16
9.1. Normative References 9.1. Normative References
[NFSv4.1] Shepler, S., Eisler, M., and D. Noveck, "NFS Version 4 [NFSv4.1] Shepler, S., Eisler, M., and D. Noveck, "NFS Version 4
Minor Version 1", draft-ietf-nfsv4-minorversion1-29 (work Minor Version 1", draft-ietf-nfsv4-minorversion1-29 (work
in progress), December 2008. in progress), December 2008.
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997. Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.
[RFC2203] Eisler, M., Chiu, A., and L. Ling, "RPCSEC_GSS Protocol
Specification", RFC 2203, September 1997.
[RFC2743] Linn, J., "Generic Security Service Application Program
Interface Version 2, Update 1", RFC 2743, January 2000.
[RFC3530] Shepler, S., Callaghan, B., Robinson, D., Thurlow, R., [RFC3530] Shepler, S., Callaghan, B., Robinson, D., Thurlow, R.,
Beame, C., Eisler, M., and D. Noveck, "Network File System Beame, C., Eisler, M., and D. Noveck, "Network File System
(NFS) version 4 Protocol", RFC 3530, April 2003. (NFS) version 4 Protocol", RFC 3530, April 2003.
[RFC3552] Rescorla, E. and B. Korver, "Guidelines for Writing RFC [RFC3552] Rescorla, E. and B. Korver, "Guidelines for Writing RFC
Text on Security Considerations", BCP 72, RFC 3552, Text on Security Considerations", BCP 72, RFC 3552,
July 2003. July 2003.
[RFC4122] Leach, P., Mealling, M., and R. Salz, "A Universally [RFC4122] Leach, P., Mealling, M., and R. Salz, "A Universally
Unique IDentifier (UUID) URN Namespace", RFC 4122, Unique IDentifier (UUID) URN Namespace", RFC 4122,
July 2005. July 2005.
[RFC4510] Zeilenga, K., "Lightweight Directory Access Protocol [RFC4510] Zeilenga, K., "Lightweight Directory Access Protocol
(LDAP): Technical Specification Road Map", RFC 4510, (LDAP): Technical Specification Road Map", RFC 4510,
June 2006. June 2006.
[RFC4513] Harrison, R., "Lightweight Directory Access Protocol
(LDAP): Authentication Methods and Security Mechanisms",
RFC 4513, June 2006.
[RFC5246] Dierks, T. and E. Rescorla, "The Transport Layer Security
(TLS) Protocol Version 1.2", RFC 5246, August 2008.
[RFC5280] Cooper, D., Santesson, S., Farrell, S., Boeyen, S., [RFC5280] Cooper, D., Santesson, S., Farrell, S., Boeyen, S.,
Housley, R., and W. Polk, "Internet X.509 Public Key Housley, R., and W. Polk, "Internet X.509 Public Key
Infrastructure Certificate and Certificate Revocation List Infrastructure Certificate and Certificate Revocation List
(CRL) Profile", RFC 5280, May 2008. (CRL) Profile", RFC 5280, May 2008.
9.2. Informational References 9.2. Informational References
[RFC1094] Nowicki, B., "NFS: Network File System Protocol [RFC1094] Nowicki, B., "NFS: Network File System Protocol
specification", RFC 1094, March 1989. specification", RFC 1094, March 1989.
[RFC1813] Callaghan, B., Pawlowski, B., and P. Staubach, "NFS [RFC1813] Callaghan, B., Pawlowski, B., and P. Staubach, "NFS
Version 3 Protocol Specification", RFC 1813, June 1995. Version 3 Protocol Specification", RFC 1813, June 1995.
[RFC2203] Eisler, M., Chiu, A., and L. Ling, "RPCSEC_GSS Protocol
Specification", RFC 2203, September 1997.
[RFC2743] Linn, J., "Generic Security Service Application Program
Interface Version 2, Update 1", RFC 2743, January 2000.
[RFC4513] Harrison, R., "Lightweight Directory Access Protocol
(LDAP): Authentication Methods and Security Mechanisms",
RFC 4513, June 2006.
[RFC5246] Dierks, T. and E. Rescorla, "The Transport Layer Security
(TLS) Protocol Version 1.2", RFC 5246, August 2008.
[TA-FORMAT] [TA-FORMAT]
Housley, R., Ashmore, S., and C. Wallace, "Trust Anchor Housley, R., Ashmore, S., and C. Wallace, "Trust Anchor
Format", draft-ietf-pkix-ta-format-03 (work in progress), Format", draft-ietf-pkix-ta-format-04 (work in progress),
May 2009. October 2009.
[TA-MGMT-REQS] [TA-MGMT-REQS]
Reddy, R. and C. Wallace, "Trust Anchor Management Reddy, R. and C. Wallace, "Trust Anchor Management
Requirements", draft-ietf-pkix-ta-mgmt-reqs-04 (work in Requirements", draft-ietf-pkix-ta-mgmt-reqs-04 (work in
progress), September 2009. progress), September 2009.
[TAMP] Housley, R., Ashmore, S., and C. Wallace, "Trust Anchor [TAMP] Housley, R., Ashmore, S., and C. Wallace, "Trust Anchor
Management Protocol (TAMP)", draft-ietf-pkix-tamp-03 (work Management Protocol (TAMP)", draft-ietf-pkix-tamp-03 (work
in progress), October 2009. in progress), October 2009.
 End of changes. 11 change blocks. 
25 lines changed or deleted 25 lines changed or added

This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.37a. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/