[nfsv4] Drafts waiting for write-up

David Noveck <davenoveck@gmail.com> Wed, 04 January 2017 12:10 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 BEEFD1294FF for <nfsv4@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 4 Jan 2017 04:10:05 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.699
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.699 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_LOW=-0.7, 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 UrsmIWah1lTQ for <nfsv4@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 4 Jan 2017 04:10:03 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-oi0-x22b.google.com (mail-oi0-x22b.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4003:c06::22b]) (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 B6A8D129492 for <nfsv4@ietf.org>; Wed, 4 Jan 2017 04:10:03 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-oi0-x22b.google.com with SMTP id b126so541045007oia.2 for <nfsv4@ietf.org>; Wed, 04 Jan 2017 04:10:03 -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:cc; bh=kB6Rr/M+jMFPZyBA9kPISKSMKe92dJd3DG9Csl0sgrE=; b=iHaAT216mfAdH1Z9jAlIPYHTyS/XPI4zF7SIqpdRsQ5HIaH1/aN6a4jUYzpJ+E8kaN pEZVUgqMsed3ipm3kZaYp54HMIxGVevTM5Rze6pdS1bxY/jFig+nA5xPfg0rL4t55e4N zaBpcYAbARxzsbavCqWXS2KUlXO/hsbGZpDmbrqYq9BAYh3VATTHoSc+ur4zdQlEF2PI 0CZodVWZjwuRciAmoPMYbgj0couuZh7lt4+pt9a1T9SJNrUdEWBKT6KStFNdGc9gvz4y BxTGGVNbwHvv3iO8xsKNouOcDb3iv+vIemEvoBFmqFWC/6HXcRqgPEe8axzpVgpYJAE3 sbBw==
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:cc; bh=kB6Rr/M+jMFPZyBA9kPISKSMKe92dJd3DG9Csl0sgrE=; b=tIzdZ5OFNkoRnQxaB3P0vbUwe+J3XsrMCHPJ8uVqJ97+wOD9nZ6mBJLfExqWpMc7W+ cTqdcmrX02lTdGZrLJDhjQ+3q2xHH0x1sP/7Q74AEvhbpo06UzFD5KZDtN/gKjd0SoJi aF3mB0WaE5YB5r1Ns2/owKX168JKyJ37Okw7OvzbhgTXBrU84REtvXtM+E/dmw/mf/8G DCb7fCuQSR3IyppNjiN+XDQLMK2XRRX9c6G/ydkpTjinubsUQ+BHB0tQ3TB+Ljsj7mUi 7uXSbJzEsHpMhd5Pt27DVscguE1Z0YQts5loI7NLDfiZP8Pt2FuyR8J2b4XZnkQ0dX92 pHVg==
X-Gm-Message-State: AIkVDXLnT6wyR1IaV1apZraPCpzHb8vXKtSQSdTufrmLDyQcv+Uxw9zj9Yh/OPPqIWpgv5rfvwgQBYlZTXM57Q==
X-Received: by 10.202.84.194 with SMTP id i185mr739166oib.50.1483531803128; Wed, 04 Jan 2017 04:10:03 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.182.137.202 with HTTP; Wed, 4 Jan 2017 04:10:02 -0800 (PST)
From: David Noveck <davenoveck@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 04 Jan 2017 07:10:02 -0500
Message-ID: <CADaq8jfWDdMkGV_V912866-p0p-UH5WMxNJcx=7QvCJad36puA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Spencer Shepler <sshepler@microsoft.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001a113d2eb8237877054543aa87"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/nfsv4/G8WmTrlexEAnChL6gmAz-RGs2UY>
Cc: "nfsv4@ietf.org" <nfsv4@ietf.org>
Subject: [nfsv4] Drafts waiting for write-up
X-BeenThere: nfsv4@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
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, 04 Jan 2017 12:10:06 -0000

This is a friendly reminder of the need to provide write-ups for:

   - draft-ietf-nfsv4-versioning
   - draft-ietf-nfsv4-xattrs
   - draft-ietf-nfsv4-umask

Given that the period since consensus was declared for these (on 12/19)
has coincided with the holidays, a nag mail at this point might be thought
premature.  I recognize that the write-ups  might be delayed for various
holiday-related reasons.

I'm sending this now mainly because you have previously indicated that a
lack of nag mails might be interpreted by you as indicating that the task in
question is not important and so I'm worried that these might wind being
indefinitely deferred as more pressing items appear on your to-do list.

I want to point out that these documents are important and that the work
already done by the authors cannot be appropriately considered until you
provide the necessary write-up.  You won't be getting further nag mails from
me until 1/18.

Thank for  your work so far on these.  Hope you have a great 2017.