IPS Draft Status and Schedule

[[e-mail]]

Here's what the WG chairs think the current status and schedule
is for the drafts that the IP Storage WG is working on (including
three individual submissions that have agenda time in Orange
County).  This is probably not 100% accurate, but should be
close.  Draft authors - please send any corrections to me.

Apologies for being tardy on this - this should have been done
about a month ago, but I have negative "copious spare time".
Going forward, the intent is to produce an updated version of
this prior to each WG meeting.  Proposed revised charter will
be coming in the near future, with milestones based on the
completion guesstimates below.

Thanks,
--David

-- iSCSI

draft-ietf-ips-iscsi-07.txt
	To be a proposed standard RFC.
	Large portions are stable, major open security and login issues.
	-08 will be a functional/technical revision, document restructure/
		reorganization expected in -09 version.
	Hope to close all major issues by December 2001 IETF meeting

draft-ietf-ips-iscsi-boot-02.txt
	No major open issues, possible minor issues in DHCP usage.
		DHCP material to be extracted into a separate
standards-track draft.	
	Remainder to become an informational RFC, after the main iSCSI
document.

draft-ietf-ips-iscsi-reqmts-05.txt
	To be an informational RFC.
	Has completed WG Last Call, currently being considered by the IESG,
		IETF Last Call has not been issued.

draft-ietf-ips-iscsi-name-disc-02.txt
	To be an informational RFC.
	Specification portions that must be standards track are being added
		to the main iSCSI specification.
	No major open issues, hope to close any other issues by December
2001 IETF
		meeting.  Plan to issue WG Last Call for this with main
iSCSI draft.

draft-ietf-ips-iscsi-slp-01.txt
	To be a proposed standard RFC.
	Close to done.  Issues in this general area seem to come up in the
		context of the naming and discovery draft (name-disc-02)
rather
		than this draft.
	WG Last Call will be after the naming and discovery draft.

draft-ietf-ips-iscsi-mib-02.txt
	To be a proposed standard RFC.
	Next (-03) version expected in September, should be close to done.
	WG Last Call will follow main iSCSI draft.
	
draft-black-ips-iscsi-security-01.txt
draft-aboba-ips-iscsi-security-00.txt
	Unlikely to become RFCs in their current forms.
	New drafts on iSCSI Security for discussion at Orange County
meeting.
		Security requirements will be specified in the main iSCSI
document.
	Some remaining portions of one or both drafts may become an
		informational RFC.  Whether to do this and what portions to
use
		are subject to discussion.

-- FC Common Encapsulation

draft-ietf-ips-fcencapsulation-02.txt
	To be a proposed standard RFC.
	No major open issues.
	Will accompany FCIP and/or iFCP drafts in Last Call, probably after
		December 2001 IETF.

-- FCIP

draft-ietf-ips-fcovertcpip-05.txt
	To be a proposed standard RFC.
	Large portions are stable, major open security issues.
	Hope to close all major issues by December 2001 IETF meeting.

draft-ietf-ips-fcip-slp-00.txt
	To be a proposed standard RFC.
	New draft for discussion in Orange County.
	Hope to close all major issues by December 2001 IETF meeting.

draft-ietf-ips-fcip-mib-00.txt
	To be a proposed standard RFC.
	New draft for discussion in Orange County.
	Likely timeframe for closing final issues is March 2002 IETF
meeting.

-- iFCP

draft-ietf-ips-ifcp-04.txt
	To be a proposed standard RFC.
	Large portions are stable, major open security issues.
	Hope to close all major issues by December 2001 IETF meeting.

draft-tseng-ifcp-mib-00.txt
	To be a proposed standard RFC.
	New draft for consideration in Orange County, will be proposed for
		approval as an official WG draft.
	Likely timeframe for closing final issues is March 2002 IETF
meeting.

-- iSNS

draft-ietf-ips-isns-04.txt
	To be a proposed standard RFC.
	Relationship to SLP for use with iSCSI seems to be settled, no
		other major open issues.
	WG Last Call to follow iSCSI and iFCP drafts.
	Hope to close any remaining issues by December 2001 IETF meeting.

draft-gibbons-isnsmib-00.txt
	To be a proposed standard RFC.
	Relatively new draft, London meeting approved it as an official
		IPS WG work item, next version will be draft-ietf-ips-...
	Likely timeframe for closing final issues is March 2002 IETF
meeting.

-- Framework

draft-ietf-ips-framework-00.txt
	Has not been updated by author team since original revision.
	Likely to be abandoned in the absence of renewed interest.

-- SCSI MIB

There's been talk about working on this, but no draft has appeared, yet.


----- Document Completion Guesstimates ------

A rough guess is 3 waves of documents:

(1) Main protocol standards.  Close technical issues at December 2001 IETF
	(or before), WG Last Call in early 2002, submit to IESG before
	March 2002 IETF Meeting.
	- iSCSI
	- iSCSI Naming/Discovery
	- FC Encapsulation
	- FCIP
	- iFCP
	Last Call scheduling will be an issue, as there are at least two,
	and possibly more 4 week (or longer) WG Last Calls required for
	the above that probably should not overlap with each other.

(2) Supporting Protocol Documents.  Close technical issues at December
	IETF if possible (but above documents have priority).  WG Last
	Call to follow above, probably in March-April 2002.
	- iSCSI Boot
	- iSCSI SLP
	- FCIP SLP
	- iSNS
	iSNS Last Call should not overlap iSCSI Last Calls, hence at least
	two will be needed, but 2 week WG Last Call periods should suffice
	for these documents.

(3) MIBs.  To follow supporting documents.  Final opportunity to discuss
	at March 2002 IETF Meeting, with WG Last Call to follow shortly
	thereafter.
	- iSCSI MIB
	- FCIP MIB
	- iFCP MIB
	- iSNS MIB
	Probably need two Last Call periods, but again, 2 weeks each
	should be sufficient.  May move Last Call schedule up if
	MIBs are ready to go earlier (e.g., after December 2001 IETF
	meeting).

The waves will overlap in practice, but each main protocol document
needs to make it through WG Last Call before any WG Last Calls are
issued for documents that depend on it.  So for any protocol, wave
(1) has to come before (2) and (3), but (2) and (3) can run in
parallel, and the different protocols may run on different schedules.

---------------------------------------------------
David L. Black, Senior Technologist
EMC Corporation, 42 South St., Hopkinton, MA  01748
[phone] x75140     FAX: [phone]
[e-mail]       Mobile: [phone]
---------------------------------------------------