Re: [nfsv4] Benjamin Kaduk's Discuss on draft-ietf-nfsv4-mv1-msns-update-04: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)
Magnus Westerlund <magnus.westerlund@ericsson.com> Wed, 08 May 2019 14:21 UTC
Return-Path: <magnus.westerlund@ericsson.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 AE5AB1200FF; Wed, 8 May 2019 07:21:08 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.01
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.01 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=ericsson.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 UbyouHkUG7SE; Wed, 8 May 2019 07:21:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from EUR01-DB5-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-eopbgr150042.outbound.protection.outlook.com [40.107.15.42]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B35A7120129; Wed, 8 May 2019 07:21:00 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ericsson.com; s=selector2; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=Gks8JoLKkACwSJzmKbMT3lA2S6GiV+OG563+4aV6hGA=; b=nIPH6GCcuS1olBhdM7hrLZ73CYaUteI9Dcn6qSiJ68EdTqPfCxO+GXPRXyf6vxwSRo236AWe8TQVyJHLaD+fP/6J/sW6vDw7g8NqX1dHX4pSJnsL8f2aQ0WI+kuwQO/3rwLTflidlk/gvoggwF5W+4pi0RuCpEhX3xnvAboUZ/4=
Received: from HE1PR0701MB2522.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com (10.168.128.149) by HE1PR0701MB2780.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com (10.168.190.144) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.1856.7; Wed, 8 May 2019 14:20:58 +0000
Received: from HE1PR0701MB2522.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::b161:fb77:e4ea:4723]) by HE1PR0701MB2522.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::b161:fb77:e4ea:4723%3]) with mapi id 15.20.1878.019; Wed, 8 May 2019 14:20:58 +0000
From: Magnus Westerlund <magnus.westerlund@ericsson.com>
To: David Noveck <davenoveck@gmail.com>, Spencer Dawkins at IETF <spencerdawkins.ietf@gmail.com>
CC: NFSv4 <nfsv4@ietf.org>, "draft-ietf-nfsv4-mv1-msns-update@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-nfsv4-mv1-msns-update@ietf.org>, "nfsv4-chairs@ietf.org" <nfsv4-chairs@ietf.org>, The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: Benjamin Kaduk's Discuss on draft-ietf-nfsv4-mv1-msns-update-04: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)
Thread-Index: AQHU08+HNDjSgrrHP0qhLq7hl/MczA==
Date: Wed, 08 May 2019 14:20:58 +0000
Message-ID: <HE1PR0701MB25228E47DAA1B605342637B095320@HE1PR0701MB2522.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com>
References: <155184411184.27685.16459405842977852294.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <CADaq8jcbtAy+RnCsxLBHpGfX7YOUCXbVU21DKKF5yOuXtwM4GQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAKKJt-c++YwyEONK=He55uX0GR+23bc1jrjjU5hxHB3ipJYwmg@mail.gmail.com> <CADaq8jcA_TP5xrCy8VXBPRASA_o8rmxOpn+7PBnhH_1=2tHGEA@mail.gmail.com> <CADaq8jdNOWEKqGxBCZ6+He6iNyUfQw7HmnU5VU=dFhFMGv=mTQ@mail.gmail.com>
Accept-Language: sv-SE, en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
authentication-results: spf=none (sender IP is ) smtp.mailfrom=magnus.westerlund@ericsson.com;
x-originating-ip: [192.176.1.80]
x-ms-publictraffictype: Email
x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: 01482f26-1628-400b-d234-08d6d3c063f4
x-microsoft-antispam: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(2390118)(7020095)(4652040)(8989299)(4534185)(4627221)(201703031133081)(201702281549075)(8990200)(5600141)(711020)(4605104)(2017052603328)(7193020); SRVR:HE1PR0701MB2780;
x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: HE1PR0701MB2780:
x-ms-exchange-purlcount: 3
x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: <HE1PR0701MB2780C12F10F0AFAEC8BF678C95320@HE1PR0701MB2780.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com>
x-ms-oob-tlc-oobclassifiers: OLM:10000;
x-forefront-prvs: 0031A0FFAF
x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10009020)(136003)(346002)(366004)(376002)(396003)(39860400002)(189003)(199004)(478600001)(446003)(3846002)(7736002)(52536014)(81166006)(7696005)(102836004)(6116002)(66946007)(186003)(55016002)(86362001)(229853002)(76176011)(4326008)(256004)(66066001)(305945005)(71200400001)(26005)(561944003)(54906003)(64756008)(66446008)(966005)(76116006)(316002)(66476007)(99286004)(2906002)(476003)(74316002)(33656002)(5660300002)(15650500001)(14454004)(71190400001)(6246003)(44832011)(8676002)(81156014)(486006)(73956011)(25786009)(6306002)(6436002)(6506007)(110136005)(68736007)(8936002)(14444005)(53936002)(66556008)(9686003)(51014002); DIR:OUT; SFP:1101; SCL:1; SRVR:HE1PR0701MB2780; H:HE1PR0701MB2522.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; LANG:en; PTR:InfoNoRecords; MX:1; A:1;
received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: ericsson.com does not designate permitted sender hosts)
x-ms-exchange-senderadcheck: 1
x-microsoft-antispam-message-info: yQ1LgpnBpFB7JdL8Vt8cFtddQtJpA831T4xpcAnWbCMvd01SbV1tsm/QLO+7eNejG4c7tS6/mr4vbIAsr03YnnzpXs+Hdy+SJObEdvBnByRcRVJTSkhm0TA8cWpnWLwr4q/rkGF+Ir7LRIaw1vKFZSil40m0gUPpCdzGIiBsXpFVOTKUbZOa0kCIQhfrgvJfa+C3ZkaprCVw8Wx9aMPpuVMjiyx5r+qtPBTJhYg9991GZQwM+HMWpnWcF3UxdZfIxtj/KdbRwNoZZYnkx1Fj/3CGR+oTXqc47ca3XepUl4xb7U6mJEAP8SE1mhnUKJLAQDQ8T9YWM1xsQgnz0zUIN6NwftYtF3zwhg4J/823pOMPooaNhRXm5UqpDLvse6EFJ2H9Ue+TVj3BFPNdHs+y4eq6pD2Mb9ARXGv6aZTdITY=
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-OriginatorOrg: ericsson.com
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: 01482f26-1628-400b-d234-08d6d3c063f4
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 08 May 2019 14:20:58.1923 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 92e84ceb-fbfd-47ab-be52-080c6b87953f
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-mailboxtype: HOSTED
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: HE1PR0701MB2780
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/nfsv4/dkFHx06xvQ5dNSX_VAmx9pZF1MM>
Subject: Re: [nfsv4] Benjamin Kaduk's Discuss on draft-ietf-nfsv4-mv1-msns-update-04: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)
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: Wed, 08 May 2019 14:21:09 -0000
Editors, WG and IESG, IESG, so the new document is this : https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-nfsv4-rfc5661-msns-update/ I have looked at this now a bit more in detail and have some comments. I am also looking at this document in the context of a proposal for a process update that could be applied in this type of case. NFSv4 WG you are very welcome to comment on what is proposed in this document https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-roach-bis-documents/ from your perspective. I do note that with your update document the RFC diff is possible to use to find the changes, but gets quite cluttered up by the introduction and many pages of excluded chapters. See for yourself here: https://tools.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url1=https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc5661.txt&url2=https://www.ietf.org/id/draft-ietf-nfsv4-rfc5661-msns-update-00.txt. I think an update according to this proposal with the full document would have a cleaner DIFF. To my understanding your document in a full form would meet the Basic Qualifications in 3.1 of the process proposal. Do the WG agree? IESG, I do want to you to consider if you think this form of an update would be sufficient in this case. As you note it is still a long document of 130+ pages. We should arrive as soon as possible to an direction for this document. Still some more detailed comments on the document. 1. The section headers. I do propose that all the "Update section" or "New Section" text are removed. 2. If it is desired to have inline reference to the corresponding section in RFC 5661 then I think one can add that as bracketed comment in the beginning of the body of the section. I only read in detail until the end of Section 3. Cheers Magnus Westerlund
- [nfsv4] Benjamin Kaduk's Discuss on draft-ietf-nf… Datatracker on behalf of Benjamin Kaduk
- Re: [nfsv4] Benjamin Kaduk's Discuss on draft-iet… Chuck Lever
- Re: [nfsv4] Benjamin Kaduk's Discuss on draft-iet… David Noveck
- Re: [nfsv4] Benjamin Kaduk's Discuss on draft-iet… Spencer Dawkins at IETF
- Re: [nfsv4] Benjamin Kaduk's Discuss on draft-iet… David Noveck
- Re: [nfsv4] Benjamin Kaduk's Discuss on draft-iet… Magnus Westerlund
- Re: [nfsv4] Benjamin Kaduk's Discuss on draft-iet… David Noveck
- Re: [nfsv4] Benjamin Kaduk's Discuss on draft-iet… David Noveck
- Re: [nfsv4] Benjamin Kaduk's Discuss on draft-iet… Magnus Westerlund
- Re: [nfsv4] Benjamin Kaduk's Discuss on draft-iet… David Noveck
- Re: [nfsv4] Benjamin Kaduk's Discuss on draft-iet… David Noveck