[AFS3-std] is the CellServDB file format a standard?

[Derrick Brashear]

I'd like to see it as implementation-specific with an optional importer from=
 the current format (storing info about source and updating when the source i=
s)

Derrick


On Dec 13, 2010, at 1:44 PM, Jeffrey Altman <jaltman@your-file-system.com> w=
rote:

> The syntax of the CellServDB file format [1] is well-known but is it a
> standard from the perspective of this group?  The answer to the question
> will determine where discussion of replacing the file format should take
> place.
>=20
> The current format is limited in what can be described and is
> unfortunately interpreted differently depending upon the client or
> server that is in use.
>=20
> For example:
>=20
> . servers only examine the IP addresses in the file
>   whereas the clients sometimes examine the IP address and
>   sometimes examine the DNS hostname
>=20
> . some clients treat a cell name followed by an empty
>   server list as an indication that DNS lookups should be
>   used and others do not
>=20
> . some clients understand server clones and some do not
>=20
> . some clients support linked cells and some do not
>=20
> Here is some of the new information that I think should be included in a
> future replacement with per cell granularity:
>=20
> . dns =3D {always, prefer-dns, prefer-local, never}
>=20
> . default port values for afs services
>=20
> . optional IPv6 addressing
>=20
> . local Kerberos realm list
>=20
> . service specific configuration data
>=20
> . server specific data
>=20
>   - default rank
>=20
>   - clone status
>=20
> Should this discussion take place as a standard or should it be treated
> as an implementation specific format?
>=20
> Jeffrey Altman
>=20
>=20
>=20
> [1] http://docs.openafs.org/Reference/5/CellServDB.html
>=20