> On 28 Dec 2016, at 00:18, Wouter Verhelst <w...@uter.be> wrote: > > On Mon, Dec 26, 2016 at 05:52:54PM +0300, Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy wrote: >> Shouldn't we add some flags to REP_META_CONTEXT, for client to be insure, is >> returned string a direct context name or some kind of wildcard? Just a flags >> field, with one flag defined for now: NBD_REP_META_CONTEXT_LEAF and others >> reserved. > > I think it should be up to the metadata context namespace definition to > define which syntax represents a direct context name and which > represents a wildcard (if the latter are supported). > > A client which doesn't know what a given metadata context implements > can't reasonably ask for information from that context anyway (since > then the client wouldn't know what to do with the returned information), > so it doesn't help much to add a flag here.
I agree. Vladimir: if this isn't clear from the text, please suggest a change. -- Alex Bligh
