On Sun, 13 Feb 2011 10:29:15 +0530 ambarisha b <[email protected]> wrote:
> Yeah, I can understand.I hadn't considered the issue of > standardisation.May be it is best that we wait a bit more , like you > say. There is still quite a bit of progress that can be made before standardization, though, as Simon has noted. Pretty much all network communication in AFS goes over a protocol called RX, and you could add IPv6 support to the RX library without needing to standardize wire-protocol changes. I'd think the first point where you see actual useful functionality in AFS is when you can communicate with an AFS database server over IPv6. It is possible to get to that point without any standardization changes (if you use SRV records to locate the dbservers), though I don't really have an idea on whether that is reasonably achievable over a summer. > Presently,I am going through the documentation and the bug tracker, > hoping to make some contribution.Do you guys suggest any particular > project , you want done, for the summer ? A project that has been mentioned before that I would very much like to see is a userspace NFS/AFS translator. I don't have a pointer to more details on the project on-hand, but it was basically taking some NFS server framework, and plugging it in to libuafs (a library for talking to AFS). That said, I thought we were still unsure whether OpenAFS was doing GSoC this year...? -- Andrew Deason [email protected] _______________________________________________ OpenAFS-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openafs.org/mailman/listinfo/openafs-devel
