The spec allows us to return NFS4ERR_SEQ_FALSE_RETRY if we notice that
the client is making a call that matches a previous (slot, seqid) pair
but that *isn't* actually a replay, because some detail of the call
doesn't actually match the previous one.

Catching every such case is difficult, but we may as well catch a few
easy ones.  This also handles the case described in the previous patch,
in a different way.

The spec does however require us to catch the case where the difference
is in the rpc credentials.  This prevents somebody from snooping another
user's replies by fabricating retries.

(But the practical value of the attack is limited by the fact that the
replies with the most sensitive data are READ replies, which are not
normally cached.)
Tested-by: Olga Kornievskaia <aglo@umich.edu>
Signed-off-by: J. Bruce Fields <bfields@redhat.com>