Re: [nfsv4] IETF 105 - Montreal - NFSv4 WG meeting ?

Chuck Lever <chuck.lever@oracle.com> Thu, 25 April 2019 21:04 UTC

Return-Path: <chuck.lever@oracle.com>
X-Original-To: nfsv4@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: nfsv4@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F3DDA120052 for <nfsv4@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 25 Apr 2019 14:04:11 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.301
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.301 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001, UNPARSEABLE_RELAY=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=oracle.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id CkL9O3i72gTa for <nfsv4@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 25 Apr 2019 14:04:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from userp2130.oracle.com (userp2130.oracle.com [156.151.31.86]) (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 038721200CE for <nfsv4@ietf.org>; Thu, 25 Apr 2019 14:04:08 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from pps.filterd (userp2130.oracle.com [127.0.0.1]) by userp2130.oracle.com (8.16.0.27/8.16.0.27) with SMTP id x3PL3gXf134531; Thu, 25 Apr 2019 21:04:07 GMT
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=oracle.com; h=content-type : mime-version : subject : from : in-reply-to : date : cc : content-transfer-encoding : message-id : references : to; s=corp-2018-07-02; bh=eD5Fu1Vx3ix0TjUgEwnVz9VXwz9JlkxIUd2tJD774KY=; b=V2i3tsj0EGvZM3l01hfyfIeRTzaPuF7O5YTNNOORTdUA2azTiJaJ0DWoTWqufEWnR3ec H3jKnQbOad8APBVJ1RNx7f+wPCi7lehX7ySB6g2shVjOKsSNWs5JCzqNims5Edt5R1Bu Du/dNQKLvRDizNCaTV5PAzeeFTlz+fJlHtlIXKiluPq+wn4aIc9cnECNhkc4Zjedz5ek Bolj5Il7LOWMu1aBewhlX//3o0m2DI7md+bL9mTYsqFWE8qtbcgURqepyMHX42bXFHni gohFqrlCYV8S2/KKB60iKzeNyrrZa9PmJcUKmfTNuAhzLl1VOD84q7BPOXSxQUdXLE5A ig==
Received: from aserp3020.oracle.com (aserp3020.oracle.com [141.146.126.70]) by userp2130.oracle.com with ESMTP id 2rytutat96-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Thu, 25 Apr 2019 21:04:07 +0000
Received: from pps.filterd (aserp3020.oracle.com [127.0.0.1]) by aserp3020.oracle.com (8.16.0.27/8.16.0.27) with SMTP id x3PL3BAj087586; Thu, 25 Apr 2019 21:04:06 GMT
Received: from userv0121.oracle.com (userv0121.oracle.com [156.151.31.72]) by aserp3020.oracle.com with ESMTP id 2s0fv4dqjy-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Thu, 25 Apr 2019 21:04:06 +0000
Received: from abhmp0018.oracle.com (abhmp0018.oracle.com [141.146.116.24]) by userv0121.oracle.com (8.14.4/8.13.8) with ESMTP id x3PL45k0010770; Thu, 25 Apr 2019 21:04:05 GMT
Received: from anon-dhcp-171.1015granger.net (/68.61.232.219) by default (Oracle Beehive Gateway v4.0) with ESMTP ; Thu, 25 Apr 2019 14:04:05 -0700
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 12.4 \(3445.104.8\))
From: Chuck Lever <chuck.lever@oracle.com>
In-Reply-To: <CADaq8jdaquKW0=jWB+H3BNbGTLVZTK=_TheN-gn52xrurn=yNw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 25 Apr 2019 17:04:03 -0400
Cc: spencer shepler <spencer.shepler@gmail.com>, NFSv4 <nfsv4@ietf.org>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <056AA26B-0DBC-4E4C-AE09-C6C6CAC26D58@oracle.com>
References: <CAFt6BakCHvOnMR5RaX59uXSga03VVskRwKVpg97CbFr+Pxiz9A@mail.gmail.com> <CADaq8jdaquKW0=jWB+H3BNbGTLVZTK=_TheN-gn52xrurn=yNw@mail.gmail.com>
To: David Noveck <davenoveck@gmail.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.104.8)
X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=nai engine=5900 definitions=9238 signatures=668685
X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 suspectscore=0 malwarescore=0 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 mlxscore=0 mlxlogscore=999 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1810050000 definitions=main-1904250131
X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=nai engine=5900 definitions=9238 signatures=668685
X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 priorityscore=1501 malwarescore=0 suspectscore=0 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 clxscore=1015 lowpriorityscore=0 mlxscore=0 impostorscore=0 mlxlogscore=999 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1810050000 definitions=main-1904250131
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/nfsv4/2Eoe467CRS32OIi0imdd-MtdFeA>
Subject: Re: [nfsv4] IETF 105 - Montreal - NFSv4 WG meeting ?
X-BeenThere: nfsv4@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: NFSv4 Working Group <nfsv4.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/nfsv4>, <mailto:nfsv4-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/nfsv4/>
List-Post: <mailto:nfsv4@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:nfsv4-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nfsv4>, <mailto:nfsv4-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 25 Apr 2019 21:04:12 -0000

From my list:

- Milestone updates (fs_locations and related, RPC/RDMA)
- Towards a set of Working Group github repositories
- Improving the performance of NFS directory operations
- An emerging Computational Storage architecture for NFS
- Long-term strategies for RPC over encrypted transports
- Replacing RFC 5661
- Open issues with integrity measurement

The directory performance and computational storage topics are
not mature and can be considered low priority for this meeting.

The others intersect with your suggestions except for the
integrity measurement topic, which I would like to keep on the
agenda for now.


> On Apr 25, 2019, at 4:56 PM, David Noveck <davenoveck@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> I can't see us not meeting given that the last time we met was at IETF102 and that we are in the midst of major effort to move NFSv4 security from its current unsatisfactory state to something better.
> 
> With regard to filling up a timeslot, I'll let Check and Trond (who, as I undertand it wil be working on a v4-specific document to go with Chuck's RPC-generic one) define their agenda items.
> 
> With regard to my own needs, we will need to discuss work on a possible rfc5661bis.   It is now pretty clear that the IESG will want to see this.  The only question is whether they will be OK with publishing rfc5661-msns-update soon.   Even if they are, there will be a need for an rfc5661bis that includes a new Security Considerations section (with a real threat analysis) and that will have to be co-ordinated with Trond and Chuck.
> 
> I know Tom thinks I'm crazy to even consider this, but, so far as I know, there is no working group consensus on this point :-)
> 
> Also, there are there are a number of documets with target dates in the second half of 2019., that we need to briefly discuss.  Given the securitty work  underway, I don't see any need to add any non-security milestones for 2020 right now.
> 
>> On Thu, Apr 25, 2019 at 4:07 PM spencer shepler <spencer.shepler@gmail.com> wrote:
>> 
>> The WG/BOF scheduling is open.
>> 
>> Does the working group have the topics/agenda items necessary to meet face to face?
>> 
>> Spencer
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> nfsv4 mailing list
>> nfsv4@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nfsv4
> _______________________________________________
> nfsv4 mailing list
> nfsv4@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nfsv4

--
Chuck Lever