[Nbd] [PATCH] doc: Restore a lost sentence about NBD_REP_ERR_BLOCK_SIZE_REQD
- To: nbd-general@lists.sourceforge.net
- Subject: [Nbd] [PATCH] doc: Restore a lost sentence about NBD_REP_ERR_BLOCK_SIZE_REQD
- From: Eric Blake <eblake@...696...>
- Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2016 16:07:02 -0600
- Message-id: <1461881222-21289-1-git-send-email-eblake@...696...>
The previous patch accidentally dropped the suggestion that a
server replying with NBD_REP_ERR_BLOCK_SIZE_REQD should first
send NBD_REP_INFO with NBD_INFO_BLOCK_SIZE, so that the client
doesn't have to do yet another round trip NBD_OPT_INFO to learn
what sizes the server plans to enforce.
Signed-off-by: Eric Blake <eblake@...696...>
---
extension-info branch
doc/proto.md | 13 +++++++------
1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
diff --git a/doc/proto.md b/doc/proto.md
index 1a0f1cf..da65df0 100644
--- a/doc/proto.md
+++ b/doc/proto.md
@@ -949,12 +949,13 @@ of the newstyle negotiation.
- `NBD_REP_ERR_BLOCK_SIZE_REQD`: The server requires the client to
request block size constraints using `NBD_INFO_BLOCK_SIZE` prior
to entering transmission phase, because the server will be using
- non-default block sizes constraints. The server MUST NOT send this
- error if block size constraints were requested with
- `NBD_INFO_BLOCK_SIZE` with the `NBD_OPT_INFO` or `NBD_OPT_GO`
- request. The server SHOULD NOT send this error if it is using
- default block size constraints or block size constraints
- negotiated out of band.
+ non-default block sizes constraints. The server SHOULD first
+ send at least an `NBD_INFO_BLOCK_SIZE` information reply before
+ giving this error. The server MUST NOT send this error if block
+ size constraints were requested with `NBD_INFO_BLOCK_SIZE` with
+ the `NBD_OPT_INFO` or `NBD_OPT_GO` request. The server SHOULD
+ NOT send this error if it is using default block size
+ constraints or block size constraints negotiated out of band.
Additionally, if TLS has not been initiated, the server MAY reply
with `NBD_REP_ERR_TLS_REQD` (instead of `NBD_REP_ERR_UNKNOWN`) to
--
2.5.5
Reply to: