Re: [nfsv4] Agenda for nfsv4 working group meeting Prague July 20

[David Noveck <[e-mail]>]

Brian wrote:

> look back on e-mail thread if you missed this.

To make it easier for people, I'm attaching some slides that give the
current draft charter and milestone proposals in a powerpunctual form.  If
people are interested in the history of the discussion, they can still look
at the e-mail thread.

I'll be posting my presentation slides next week after we've had our
discussion to co-ordinate our respective presentations on re-charter
issues.  Until we've done that, I'm not sure exactly what will  be in my
presentation


On Mon, Jul 10, 2017 at 11:10 AM, David Noveck <[e-mail]> wrote:

> We can call it a "discussion" if you feel more comfortable with that.
>
>
> On Mon, Jul 10, 2017 at 10:53 AM, Brian Pawlowski <[e-mail]>
> wrote:
>
>> So... let's definitely not call this a meeting. We'll have one of those
>> on Thursday.
>>
>> But I will have office hours from 6-7pm in the conference hotel. You will
>> find me sitting near the lobby.
>>
>> You can send me e-mail if you have difficulty locating me... I will be
>> checking it all the time between those hours.
>>
>> beepy
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Jul 10, 2017 at 7:43 AM, David Noveck <[e-mail]>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> ad hoc is better than post hoc :-)
>>>
>>> On Mon, Jul 10, 2017 at 10:18 AM, Chuck Lever <[e-mail]>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> > On Jul 10, 2017, at 8:53 AM, David Noveck <[e-mail]>
>>>> wrote:
>>>> >
>>>> > I'll also be in Prague Sunday.
>>>>
>>>> Me too. A gentle request to keep arrangements for ad hoc recharter
>>>> meetings on the list, so others may attend! Thanks.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> > I have put together a short presentation regarding the re-charter
>>>> discussion.  Lately I've been focusing on SECDIR's comments about the
>>>> existing security considerations section in RFC7530.  Let's get together
>>>> some time (how about Monday morning?) and co-ordinate our presentations to
>>>> avoid overlap.
>>>> >
>>>> > So far, with regard to the re-charter I've kept the response to these
>>>> security issues pretty minimal.  It is limited to us saying that, as part
>>>> of maintenance we will try to meet IESG expectations in this regard, while
>>>> allowing us to do extensions "to meet new security challenges".
>>>> >
>>>> > My worry is that this might not be enough and that the working needs
>>>> to consider something more substantial.  I don't think we can arrive at a
>>>> new direction for NFSv4 security at IETF99 but at least we need to raise
>>>> the issue of a possible change now to get some idea of what might be
>>>> possible.  It would help if we got more specifics about what SECDIR is
>>>> looking for.  If we could set up some meetings with SECDIR before Thursday,
>>>> we would have a better framework for the working group meeting.
>>>> Alternatively, it would help to have some SECDIR people attend our meeting
>>>> and take part in the discussion.
>>>> >
>>>> > On Mon, Jul 10, 2017 at 5:40 AM, Brian Pawlowski <
>>>> [e-mail]> wrote:
>>>> > Thanks Dave N. for driving discussion.
>>>> >
>>>> > I will be posting this to IETF meeting site. Please note that the
>>>> agenda includes bashing to make adjustments at meeting.
>>>> >
>>>> > I will be in Prague on Sunday before hand. Would like to curl up with
>>>> people to go over recharter discussion before Thursday to make sure I have
>>>> a good strawman. Again Dave N. did  great job of teeing this up (look back
>>>> on e-mail thread if you missed this).
>>>> >
>>>> > beepy
>>>> > in Munich
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> > _______________________________________________
>>>> > nfsv4 mailing list
>>>> > [e-mail]
>>>> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nfsv4
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> > _______________________________________________
>>>> > nfsv4 mailing list
>>>> > [e-mail]
>>>> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nfsv4
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Chuck Lever
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>