[AFS3-std] Request for a capability bit for RxOSD

[Simon Wilkinson]

On 18 Jun 2009, at 10:05, Felix Frank wrote:
>
> Bottom line is that OSD does and will function without any  
> capability bit. What I hope to achieve is greater acceptance by  
> potential users, smaller reluctance from the AFS community to  
> approve use of reserved/unused protocol fields and for OpenAFS, more  
> thorough code segregation of RxOSD (again, in the interest of user  
> acceptance).

My view is that it isn't acceptable for OpenAFS to ship code which  
hijacks fields that have historical conflicts, regardless of whether  
the use of those fields is protected by capability bits or not. The  
correct approach here is to make new RPCs to suit RxOSD's requirements  
- and it's there that energy should be directed.

I believe that we have a mechanism for doing this, and for doing so in  
a timely fashion. If you believe that new RPCs won't solve your  
problems, then please let us know that, rather than devising  
additional ways to shoehorn your requirements into the existing  
structures.

Cheers,

Simon.