From: Brent (brent@eng.sun.com)
Date: 07/13/01-05:07:03 PM Z
Message-ID: <3B4F7107.4A50FCE2@eng.sun.com> Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2001 15:07:03 -0700 From: Brent <brent@eng.sun.com> Subject: Re: Server "Mount" Questions Eric Kadison wrote: > Three questions: > 1. Does the server have any of the responsibility in re-exporting "fsa1"? > Or is this purely a client function? Not quite sure what you're asking here. The client shouldn't have to do anything different than it would for a normal, non-re-exporting server. The re-exporting client/server in the middle is that one that has to do all the work. > 2. Is there any reason a server might want to internally provide a mount > (or re-export) function if that host did not also have client functionality? Again, not sure what you're asking. I don't understand the terminology: is "server" the original server or a re-exporting client/server ? > 3. Is the server supposed to report a different filesystem id for the > pseudo-fs than its real fs? Ah, that's easy: a pseudo filesystem has to have a different different filesystem id from the exported filesystems it provides paths to. Clients need to be able to detect a change in filesystem id when they cross from a pseudo filesystem into a real one - so that they can do a mount and preserve POSIX semantics. Brent
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : 03/04/05-01:48:55 AM Z CST