[Gen-art] Review: draft-ietf-nfsv4-scsi-layout-06.txt

"Joel M. Halpern" <jmh@joelhalpern.com> Tue, 05 July 2016 22:26 UTC

Return-Path: <jmh@joelhalpern.com>
X-Original-To: gen-art@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: gen-art@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EF0D312B022; Tue, 5 Jul 2016 15:26:25 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.722
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.722 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=joelhalpern.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 4IaG7Ub-noLA; Tue, 5 Jul 2016 15:26:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mailb2.tigertech.net (mailb2.tigertech.net []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 733DC12B02C; Tue, 5 Jul 2016 15:26:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by mailb2.tigertech.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 591771C0711; Tue, 5 Jul 2016 15:26:24 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=joelhalpern.com; s=1.tigertech; t=1467757584; bh=mPWLjka48jPqWZ18g7xttaEXyVb/X72ZMMTjxlHOunI=; h=Subject:To:References:From:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=RrYddTaee1sbcA4RDGQHtWWYF5lpDAZ5lSNY4GrZFvKAJTxxh2sE3t9be3cCCJEPn TZBRE6nNVzg9fbGZU25LVfBU4rTD+WIFIerL3UWZp3qUFsQczH87hs21pkGeUGduF9 ol/xXC6dZ1DNZppkT9lxdXNGMMDH9Zkr6ice8pPE=
X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at b2.tigertech.net
Received: from Joels-MacBook-Pro.local (209-255-163-147.ip.mcleodusa.net []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mailb2.tigertech.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id D4DAF1C06FE; Tue, 5 Jul 2016 15:26:23 -0700 (PDT)
To: "A. Jean Mahoney" <mahoney@nostrum.com>, General Area Review Team <gen-art@ietf.org>, draft-ietf-nfsv4-scsi-layout@ietf.org
References: <0a6a03b5-e2a1-ec55-f442-fd281c197649@nostrum.com>
From: "Joel M. Halpern" <jmh@joelhalpern.com>
Message-ID: <6d22d0e0-ba32-5a6a-f3f4-b0aed9c95dc6@joelhalpern.com>
Date: Tue, 5 Jul 2016 18:26:22 -0400
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.9; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.1.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <0a6a03b5-e2a1-ec55-f442-fd281c197649@nostrum.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/gen-art/PIkM4v_CavnPgS2lKIXB588P8-o>
Subject: [Gen-art] Review: draft-ietf-nfsv4-scsi-layout-06.txt
X-BeenThere: gen-art@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: "GEN-ART: General Area Review Team" <gen-art.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/gen-art>, <mailto:gen-art-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/gen-art/>
List-Post: <mailto:gen-art@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gen-art-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art>, <mailto:gen-art-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 05 Jul 2016 22:26:26 -0000

I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Area
Review Team (Gen-ART) reviews all IETF documents being processed
by the IESG for the IETF Chair.  Please treat these comments just
like any other last call comments.

For more information, please see the FAQ at


Document: draft-ietf-nfsv4-scsi-layout-06.txt
     Parallel NFS (pNFS) SCSI Layout
Reviewer: Joel M. Halpern
Review Date: 5-July-2016
IETF LC End Date: 12-July-2016
IESG Telechat date: N/A

Summary: This document is ready for publication as a Proposed Standard.

The reviewer notes that he fouund the document quite readable, but 
nonetheless made no effort to review the storage details.

Major issues:

Minor issues:

Nits/editorial comments:
     It seems likely that the cross-reference in section 3.3 paragraph 1 
which points to section 2.1 is actually intended to point to section 3.1