IETF Logo Mail Archive

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

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email