RE: [Ips] ips WG Last Call: iSCSI Implementer's Guide

Black_David@emc.com Tue, 13 February 2007 02:12 UTC

Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HGn9L-00014Z-4c; Mon, 12 Feb 2007 21:12:07 -0500
Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HGn9K-00014R-4f for ips@ietf.org; Mon, 12 Feb 2007 21:12:06 -0500
Received: from mexforward.lss.emc.com ([128.222.32.20]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HGn9I-0004Jd-Qs for ips@ietf.org; Mon, 12 Feb 2007 21:12:06 -0500
Received: from mailhub.lss.emc.com (nirah.lss.emc.com [10.254.144.13]) by mexforward.lss.emc.com (Switch-3.1.7/Switch-3.1.7) with ESMTP id l1D2C40S008166; Mon, 12 Feb 2007 21:12:04 -0500 (EST)
Received: from corpussmtp3.corp.emc.com (corpussmtp3.corp.emc.com [10.254.64.53]) by mailhub.lss.emc.com (Switch-3.1.8/Switch-3.1.7) with ESMTP id l1D2BlgZ029040; Mon, 12 Feb 2007 21:12:01 -0500 (EST)
From: Black_David@emc.com
Received: from CORPUSMX20A.corp.emc.com ([128.221.62.12]) by corpussmtp3.corp.emc.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Mon, 12 Feb 2007 21:12:00 -0500
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Subject: RE: [Ips] ips WG Last Call: iSCSI Implementer's Guide
Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2007 21:11:59 -0500
Message-ID: <F222151D3323874393F83102D614E055068B8D9F@CORPUSMX20A.corp.emc.com>
In-reply-to: <5B9DA9FB-1784-4A4B-AAB4-2026874DA08E@nokia.com>
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
Thread-Topic: [Ips] ips WG Last Call: iSCSI Implementer's Guide
Thread-Index: AcdO4aSdIYc307NSRk2VzAVmiX/45wAMlOWA
X-Priority: 1
Priority: Urgent
Importance: high
References: <899168.37170.qm@web51911.mail.yahoo.com> <5B9DA9FB-1784-4A4B-AAB4-2026874DA08E@nokia.com>
To: lars.eggert@nokia.com, cb_mallikarjun@yahoo.com
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 13 Feb 2007 02:12:00.0088 (UTC) FILETIME=[5830C580:01C74F14]
X-PMX-Version: 4.7.1.128075, Antispam-Engine: 2.5.0.283055, Antispam-Data: 2007.2.12.174933
X-PerlMx-Spam: Gauge=, SPAM=4%, Reason='EMC_FROM_0+ -2, PRIORITY_NO_NAME 0.716, NO_REAL_NAME 0, __CP_URI_IN_BODY 0, __CT 0, __CTE 0, __CTYPE_CHARSET_QUOTED 0, __CT_TEXT_PLAIN 0, __HAS_MSGID 0, __HAS_X_PRIORITY 0, __IMS_MSGID 0, __MIME_TEXT_ONLY 0, __MIME_VERSION 0, __SANE_MSGID 0'
X-Spam-Score: 0.3 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: 8b431ad66d60be2d47c7bfeb879db82c
Cc: ips@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: ips@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: IP Storage <ips.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ips>, <mailto:ips-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:ips@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ips-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ips>, <mailto:ips-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: ips-bounces@ietf.org

I have not yet read this draft, which a WG Chair is required
to do before sending the publication request to Lars, so
let's do a quick respin, especially as a normative reference
to RFC 3721 is going to cause "reference to RFC at lower
publication status" concerns/issues.

Thanks,
--David 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Lars Eggert [mailto:lars.eggert@nokia.com] 
> Sent: Monday, February 12, 2007 3:06 PM
> To: ext Mallikarjun C.
> Cc: ips@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [Ips] ips WG Last Call: iSCSI Implementer's Guide
> 
> On 2007-2-12, at 11:45, ext Mallikarjun C. wrote:
> > You are right about the reference to 3721.  Sorry about that.  The  
> > Introduction should have said:
> > "The text in this document, however, updates
> >     and supersedes the text in [RFC3720] whenever
> >     there is such a question."
> >
> > Consequently, the normative reference in section 12.1 to [RFC3721]  
> > should move down to the informative references in section 12.2.
> 
> OK
> 
> > On the "Updates" boilerplate..... I was not aware of such a  
> > section.  I ran the draft through the i-d nit tool and it didn't  
> > complain, so I assumed it should be alright.
> 
> The idnits tool can't check this (yet). See http://www.ietf.org/ID- 
> Checklist.html Section 3.
> 
> Also note that the IESG likes to see "Intended status:" 
> fields in IDs  
> these days, because it lets idnits check for DOWNREFs. I'd consider  
> adding one.
> 
> > On the best way to address these tweaks - wait for the IESG review  
> > and then consider the RFC Editor publication process to address  
> > them?  Or would you suggest another revision now?
> 
> Up to the chair and editor to decide. If it's all the same to you, I  
> have a slight preference for a quick respin.
> 
> Lars
> 
> 
> 

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