From owner-freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Thu Mar 1 08:08:59 2018 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2AE63F3BAF5 for ; Thu, 1 Mar 2018 08:08:59 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from mail@osfux.nl) Received: from vm1982.vellance.net (vm1982.vellance.net [79.99.187.212]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B298874259 for ; Thu, 1 Mar 2018 08:08:58 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from mail@osfux.nl) Received: from vm1982.vellance.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by vm1982.vellance.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id E4AFC2014F; Thu, 1 Mar 2018 09:08:45 +0100 (CET) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=osfux.nl; s=default; t=1519891730; bh=nStEpV/H67UwnwOlzkrNUvfVCT1I1j63pgfTB1uHfHI=; h=Subject:To:References:From:Date:In-Reply-To; b=Cok5HeGS+emieV+lSAHuxcYjpXpxhDiYlsKNPircYLHqSXKCw+0onfpO7qEoh+1LS YtS/XBXTsxNe42ZQ6/jItloeU3DM3UQauvOHuZISgWSEWs1dwMA+ivQ1Z0RXmHhOvU jhCOi2fQv/mI5B62Gj9SQ19tHhGyFVmx5QNJHW1PTkKKNOS274U6raUrjvmickcLiu y09DlNAwsXwsvlrUw5fCe6c4JF4swqUq5lMJAsPb/AKVZu74GhCABwb9W8ERsgGJL3 Hu9NSeyNt2TSade6HXmKU5wE64oFoV/yYsBsSAA0XyEp83qvec8JQd8QRgCZ2N2GFT aL9SxnbkpLnLNpHtLWax3Ygl8LTH/j6RRzd3T1iGaveD8V0aimFWNlimJK0fwTTKcF 89d3MFmKcx5RyjPVkkHENhXcQtzTkdHGvkPbn1+rKGsM0BlOM+Sq8PpLRGa3DNXQLL t4y7Ni0EprL4RkblowFTGCUO7BponXCCGUHIw2vXoltm4NUab7NGWTTleMy2Crj8Kg wwugDBvE+XICw9xEGMJvCH3DCnfnzrdRev+IJPqeEIL+nH4Cp8wixnIaMaU2sNyHLQ h4uVVK49rpGYBwNB9Cje6b2eCda/BYqIsnuMAJBzIGlpgtYfs0R7eV2oANXYlYlbaH dz3+cwQyOXyMmiz4dg3boPpY= Received: from vm1982.vellance.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by vm1982.vellance.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8E2A820126; Thu, 1 Mar 2018 09:08:35 +0100 (CET) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=osfux.nl; s=default; t=1519891724; bh=nStEpV/H67UwnwOlzkrNUvfVCT1I1j63pgfTB1uHfHI=; h=Subject:To:References:From:Date:In-Reply-To; b=prX7CDyqE/3GWVxSTT3kQ+0w4mrL4qRMj4WBq/hupWjjPwnzlcn+jeOQG7gh13Mb+ VHbwlAl253Y+z/LmPVxkBt5mOjMtRQ/b1UAHtqpumG8FuKs3rJyfFRsbr8xgfIfuls pWaRmtejPeMAYkfYckHM6TlJLD5jxM7703unds3fAt5TM8/Ql/nUxq7hBkfRWc6b3s 6ERBLeo1PRoiR1nPfh1o7P1QjjlTw1pK4P3GFp25P9VnWgBZJ/PCDv/M7M0EFCVzQQ h3MB9zvls1EtVGM+CGmzo2pHl6FGbn+VD4yHVRA2QV3Rh/eEgRtK4RTZl+Y9XitAyq 0MbEyvpo0h4Ksb1aoDs+helLETZPbLLY4sGaiuHbvY5B4emF4Z0Jg65ko9EkNywcUW kVvVhREsKZeUdI5+f+wNa3YEAK5oo57WxYGoaarwHdwpyZ2zMJ8Kf6+LGSNSEJkQ4k mMMeKc2JgJ3gF3E9c4d9APrezJoUtBbIvTP6u1tYKaufLy4TplilK2gKzkpfH+GZL5 k7RtoX48zxgXDSYCedBLV/H4dZHb7UzcFEu1GGRyHJkOHI80oFfA/nOMVV1Cq7rzK9 DflvIBilwMKTHOQmb2b9NN3To8uwDZh9zvekZo/tqvFFb5Zep2jWyW4YNNiXYSyotW xYOXQRUOi2Lvafzt/xH33SsY= X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.1 (2015-04-28) on vm1982.vellance.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.0 required=5.0 tests=ALL_TRUSTED autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.1 Received: from rubens-MacBook-Air.local (ip51ccb320.speed.planet.nl [81.204.179.32]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by vm1982.vellance.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA; Thu, 1 Mar 2018 09:08:33 +0100 (CET) Subject: Re: Linux NFSv4 clients: bad sequence-id errors. To: Rick Macklem , "freebsd-fs@freebsd.org" References: <897d0abd-0770-a61c-5a1f-f267cd10e3d2@osfux.nl> From: Ruben Message-ID: Date: Thu, 1 Mar 2018 09:08:32 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.13; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Content-Language: en-US X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV using ClamSMTP X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.25 Precedence: list List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 01 Mar 2018 08:08:59 -0000 Hi Rick, On 28/02/2018 23:44, Rick Macklem wrote: [] > Hopefully, NFSv4.1 will work well for you. I am not, in general, a > "newer version is better" guy, but NFSv4.1 fixed a lot of things poorly > done in NFSv4.0 (and the minor version # change was more logistics > than a reflection of how much changed). For example, the NFSv4.1 > RFC (5661) is over 500pages long. (I still haven't read it all in enough > detail that I am sure everything I've done is correct, but I think it's close.;-) Just glancing over it was an epic undertaking.....    > Thanks. I'll take a look at it, although I'll admit I am more interested in > problems w.r.t. NFSv4.1 at this point. (If you do run into issues with NFSv4.1, > please post about them.) Will do! Regards, Ruben