[cifs-protocol] Status: SRX091209600095 [MS-SMB] error returns

[Christopher R. Hertel]

Bill,

I completely DISAGREE with these changes.

I'll address this through other channels.

Chris -)-----

Bill Wesse wrote:
> Good morning Chris. I am advised we have some changes planned for [MS-CIFS] concerning error codes. I have attached a pdf showing the tentative changed text, which addresses the SMB_FLAGS2_NT_STATUS bit, along with a Windows Behavior note.
> 
> Please let me know your considerations concerning this.
> 
> Regards,
> Bill Wesse
> MCSE, MCTS / Senior Escalation Engineer, US-CSS DSC PROTOCOL TEAM
> 8055 Microsoft Way
> Charlotte, NC 28273
> Email:	billwe at microsoft.com
> Tel: 	+1(980) 776-8200
> Cell: 	+1(704) 661-5438
> Fax: 	+1(704) 665-9606
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bill Wesse 
> Sent: Thursday, January 14, 2010 2:45 PM
> To: 'Christopher R. Hertel'
> Cc: tim.prouty at isilon.com; Jeremy Allison; pfif at tridgell.net; cifs-protocol at samba.org; Gary Shang; José Rivera
> Subject: RE: STATUS_OS2_INVALID_LEVEL
> 
> Thanks for the clarification about the SMB_FLAGS2_NT_STATUS bit flipping (I inadvertently generalized that to your comments concerning 32-bit wire-identical to DOS&OS/2 style Class/Code pairs).
> 
> As you have already seen (or will no doubt shortly see), the internal conversation about whose lap the work will land in is expanding.
> 
> Concerning the supplemental content (if that becomes necessary), a KB sounds reasonable - we do have some KBs that fall into that brain space (for example, the following, which I think may need an update):
> 
> INFO: Mapping NT Status Error Codes to Win32 Error Codes
> http://support.microsoft.com/kb/113996
> 
> On that same topic, I am sure there are better formats that could made available on a possible Blog entry (http://blogs.msdn.com/OpenSpecification); zipped attachments there could include .csv (or tab-delimited) files running this down (and don't we all love those when we have source identifiers / enum's / data to declare...). Nothing like a good old-fashioned regex party!
> 
> Regards,
> Bill Wesse
> MCSE, MCTS / Senior Escalation Engineer, US-CSS DSC PROTOCOL TEAM
> 8055 Microsoft Way
> Charlotte, NC 28273
> Email:	billwe at microsoft.com
> Tel: 	+1(980) 776-8200
> Cell: 	+1(704) 661-5438
> Fax: 	+1(704) 665-9606
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Christopher R. Hertel [mailto:crh at ubiqx.mn.org] 
> Sent: Thursday, January 14, 2010 2:16 PM
> To: Bill Wesse
> Cc: tim.prouty at isilon.com; Jeremy Allison; pfif at tridgell.net; cifs-protocol at samba.org; Gary Shang; José Rivera
> Subject: Re: STATUS_OS2_INVALID_LEVEL
> 
> Bill Wesse wrote:
>> Thanks for the heads up Christopher - you are totally correct in saying
>> my comments on the complexity of NT platform SMB error returns were
>> meant to be 'polite understatements' (especially that pesky flipped
>> response SMB_FLAGS2_NT_STATUS bit, not to mention the 'occasionally
>> optional' WordCount and ByteCount absence from transact2 responses).
> 
> The thing about the flipped bit:  The SMB_FLAGS2_NT_STATUS bit is *NOT*
> cleared by Windows NT when sending one of the suspect error codes.  NT, that
> is, is saying that it's a 32-bit code.  We've documented these codes as such
> in [MS-CIFS].  It makes it MUCH easier to document the entire problem.
> 
> Basically, though, what we're dealing with is a 20-year-old kludge with no
> clear fix.  It simply needs to be explained so that implementers can work
> with it.
> 
>> I will shortly forward your email to concerned internal parties...
> 
> I'm available internally as v-chhert.
> Yeah... I'm a double agent!  :)
> Say hello to Will and Darryl for me.
> 
>> I have no doubt a complete rundown of all the exceptions to the rule
>> would be quite valuable to our respective organizations and customers
> 
> It's difficult to get the documentation right but it can be explained and
> doing so would probably help you guys out.
> 
>> - figuring what to do in response to a 'surprise' error value classifies
>> as yet another 'polite understatement'.
> 
> :)
> 
>> I won't rule out the possibility of (my team) providing supplemental
>> content concerning this, in case the documents aren't the optimal place
>> for the info - I hate to state the obvious, but a complete WB
>> description of the above for all NT/SMB (or just transact2) would be
>> pretty big.
> 
> Perhaps a KB article that we can reference from a WB?
> 
>> There I go again. Another understatement.
> 
> :)
> 
> Chris -)-----
> 
> 
>> --
>> "Implementing CIFS - the Common Internet FileSystem" ISBN: 013047116X
>> Samba Team -- http://www.samba.org/     -)-----   Christopher R. Hertel
>> jCIFS Team -- http://jcifs.samba.org/   -)-----   ubiqx development, uninq.
>> ubiqx Team -- http://www.ubiqx.org/     -)-----   crh at ubiqx.mn.org
>> OnLineBook -- http://ubiqx.org/cifs/    -)-----   crh at ubiqx.org
>>
>>