IETF Logo Mail Archive

[nfsv4] Milestone for RDMA pNFS layout type

David Noveck <davenoveck@gmail.com> Tue, 10 December 2019 16:20 UTC

Return-Path: <davenoveck@gmail.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 5EC72120100 for <nfsv4@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 10 Dec 2019 08:20:38 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.998
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.998 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.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 JN-ORLBYKQkW for <nfsv4@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 10 Dec 2019 08:20:36 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-ot1-x331.google.com (mail-ot1-x331.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::331]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C3BDD1201DB for <nfsv4@ietf.org>; Tue, 10 Dec 2019 08:20:36 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-ot1-x331.google.com with SMTP id i15so16006497oto.7 for <nfsv4@ietf.org>; Tue, 10 Dec 2019 08:20:36 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=m10QC21P1F8O225dJVtti2RTsM5NsHxwrkov1vn1IgE=; b=vGKni3ure06yqG25hUCUOamsN2pMtGrDlBnG8K1DgII9C4facBfnqRuEVSmNCcgYV4 6mC9kGYmHeZ+ufqx5q6kbV22yPeW+iJwtVuuKb6udGj2xPgwZo/Nkqzbyp6cxM2SMGNJ aDmnzpSYPSD/6LujBwj46D3XYY+thPsLAGxqeW01VMeSR0+bL0RYYYdFS/AsQD/Ey5LD 4d3cQbZQfu6aAgqsrm99hlLjBgp6IU6GdyVKOcHeQpKz0a8xinampgmRBm4h7oT/pJBv /PxGFuF4Iyfxu7eVsxhKPfBkDk4ipZ0AoL4tCWwJy46c6vUpFBBx4LYmZ/BXFk9+3T2i 7fmQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=m10QC21P1F8O225dJVtti2RTsM5NsHxwrkov1vn1IgE=; b=gJn6DPsf39K6CsJMiOfuk9J0qeRg/pHKOzYDFI+byGq34iF+sRtS3JJZCFS9UvZTYr FKs8ktfRU0ZvDWRZsUy5ZOgV7ZDKavfXFaoNOzoyxl48Lm3n81iohm4SqiDouFXsVm3b WcHK7g51xYEXAy+1FiXto+aIvsAfXZZIQJKY6/5fDwnQnjRLjo1sWtk8mw6P47d62kT5 aMkrhf84BkSssug63TiuQe8LsYUbl5oZQ/VwotPqusFnPPEpAAcu7VBwb6M5SzXLDyEt ofkT+qoNBwD4X3tHD3Yc7uFt6PfIS/f86e4nsCPVY/see7FF9CWmYm7Jy2MsKawT3jZm UQ9A==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAWOUGQBaLUo3uQN3J+YoNPFuThh0gpsofLyajvCYmPJqstr3LDw Ujt6XDamOE7WTpfgGT3RKBxcMb91uO41v92NAqQ9Nw==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqwGJ0k/h1nriVB9ffnQ3zYfhbByQIKKYc+gfpmjrL3HpBATk9zBlpb9Cm/2JDJOXBlO9YB9fl+ehrYh/yhk2l0=
X-Received: by 2002:a05:6830:1704:: with SMTP id 4mr11575462otk.294.1575994835840; Tue, 10 Dec 2019 08:20:35 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
From: David Noveck <davenoveck@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2019 11:20:25 -0500
Message-ID: <CADaq8jdoRUaFJN0V523NkZtQCqX7W_4d14hb10DJGA_n9QYB2Q@mail.gmail.com>
To: NFSv4 <nfsv4@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000005bb54e05995be40f"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/nfsv4/2tWEyIvKeDcb4Ij6uPBWVuj4NvE>
Subject: [nfsv4] Milestone for RDMA pNFS layout type
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: Tue, 10 Dec 2019 16:20:38 -0000

I think we need to get rid of the milestone for the RDMA layout type for
pNFS.   The target date has already past (it is  9/2019) and given the fact
that there no current document and nobody to work on it now, I think we
should drop this and establish a new milestone when we have a viable plan
to get it done.

My impression was that this was  discssed at IETF 105 and  the general
opinion was that there was no point in keep this in existence.  However I
am unable to verify that.

In any case, we need a WG consensus to drop this so, if you feel we should
do something else, send a message to the working group list, within the
next week, explaining why you feel we should keep this milestone in
existence

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email