RE: [imss] Vancouver Minutes (DRAFT)

Roger,

1) is an AI to you (Roger).  Please cc: me so that I
	can track the results.

2) will be corrected in the final minutes.

I will also remove your T11.5 chair affiliation from the
FLIP agenda item in the minutes to match the bashed agenda.

Thanks,
--David
p.s.  How come none of the Symantec pens here at IETF
	work? I'm sitting in front of a pile of them.
	I know ... they're not Veritas pens ;-).
----------------------------------------------------
David L. Black, Senior Technologist
EMC Corporation, 176 South St., Hopkinton, MA  01748
+1 (508) 293-7953             FAX: +1 (508) 293-7786
black_david@emc.com        Mobile: +1 (978) 394-7754
----------------------------------------------------

> David,
> 
> Thanks for posting the minutes so promptly.
> 
> Two minor points:
> 
> 1) Bert made a suggestion that a message is sent to the Netconf mailing
> list soliciting interest in helping with the schema definition. Is that
> an AI to you or I?
> 
> 2) I'd like to modify the last sentence to read " The FLIP concept and
> suggested use of netconf will be discussed further at T11 before the
> next imss meeting." The focus for December has to be resolving FAIS
> Letter Ballot comments, and if that means that the FLIP discussion
> doesn't get done until later, that's the way it should be.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Roger
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: imss-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:imss-bounces@ietf.org] On 
> > Behalf Of Black_David@emc.com
> > Sent: Wednesday, November 09, 2005 1:28 PM
> > To: imss@ietf.org
> > Subject: [imss] Vancouver Minutes (DRAFT)
> > 
> > Please send any corrections, etc. to the list.
> > 
> > Thanks,
> > --David
> > 
> > Internet and Management Support for Storage (imss) WG Meeting 
> > - Vancouver, Canada Tuesday, November 8, 2005: 1740-1840 
> > Minutes - DRAFT
> > ------------------------------------------------------
> > 
> > Administrivia, agenda bashing, draft status review, etc.: 15 min
> > 		David L. Black, EMC (new imss WG chair)
> > 	Blue sheets
> > 	Note Well
> > 	Milestones (see WG charter page on IETF web site)
> > 	WG Draft status
> > 		- IP over FC draft is in IETF Last Call
> > 		- FAM and NSM MIBs should go to IETF Last Call by the
> > 			end of next week (Keith McCloghrie and 
> > Bert Wijnen
> > 			will coordinate to make this happen).
> > 		- Remaining 3 WG MIBs will go to WG Last Call by end
> > 			of November.
> > 
> > --> Record status
> > 
> > T11.5 Status, Fibre Channel MIBs under development: 20 min
> > 		Roger Cummings (Symantec, T11.5 chair)
> > 
> > See slides.
> > 
> > T11.5 has 3 more MIBs that will be sent to the imss WG - Zone 
> > Server MIB, Registered State Change Notification MIB, and 
> > Fabric Configuration Server MIB.  The imss WG's current Apr 
> > 06 milestone to determine what to do next will be replaced by 
> > a milestone (later in 2006) to work on these 3 MIBs.  These 3 
> > MIBs may not be ready for handoff to imss prior to the next 
> > IETF meeting, but the mechanism used in Paris for the VF MIB 
> > can be reused - the imss WG can decide to accept the drafts 
> > as official WG drafts subject to a pending T11 formal votes 
> > to pass change control to the IETF.
> > 
> > T11.5 is considering assigning MIB development responsibility 
> > to protocol development work groups instead of the current 
> > approach of having a separate group that works on MIBs.  This 
> > will be discussed at the T11 meetings in early December.
> > 
> > FLIP (FAIS Line Interface Protocol) Conceptual Discussion: 25 min
> > 		Roger Cummings (Symantec, T11.5 chair)
> > 	 draft-cummings-imss-flip-00.txt
> > 
> > See presentation.  Netconf appears promising for the 
> > configuration aspects of FLIP, but currently contains no 
> > support for events or notifications from the configured 
> > device.  Use of netconf would result in functionality at the 
> > level of the configuration model instead of a 1-1 match 
> > between FAIS API calls and RPCs.  The required 
> > event/notification mechanism needs to be capable of carrying 
> > a fair amount of structured information - it is somewhat 
> > analogous to the use of COPS to ask a policy decision point 
> > "I just received this RSVP reservation request, what should I 
> > do about it?".  There are also concerns about effective 
> > transmission of bulk binary data (encoding in XML is 
> > unworkable, but encapsulation or wrapping in XML is probably 
> > ok).  The netconf group is not currently standardizing 
> > schemas, but will want/need to, so this could be a timely 
> > interaction between imss and netconf.
> > 
> > The FLIP concept and suggested use of netconf will be 
> > discussed further in the early December T11 meetings.
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > imss mailing list
> > imss@ietf.org
> > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/imss
> > 
> 

_______________________________________________
imss mailing list
imss@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/imss