Re: [nfsv4] IETF 102 nfsv4 WG meeting go/no-go

David Noveck <davenoveck@gmail.com> Mon, 21 May 2018 19:29 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 E8E1F12E8D7 for <nfsv4@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 21 May 2018 12:29:02 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.999
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 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_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 PtAevij1eMsG for <nfsv4@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 21 May 2018 12:29:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-ot0-x233.google.com (mail-ot0-x233.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4003:c0f::233]) (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 29BB712E8DC for <nfsv4@ietf.org>; Mon, 21 May 2018 12:29:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-ot0-x233.google.com with SMTP id 15-v6so18127517otn.12 for <nfsv4@ietf.org>; Mon, 21 May 2018 12:29:00 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=qZP+qpoNhOWm8cCx370uDX3Sbkfn/dX0iX8el4xHGaA=; b=bzfp2KE22f/ienvl3MJoHtudN1Iio7CNGV+ItMH58WTWr+97gacDX5JFCZfZ5hLPDg 5dRx9chuB/Oa5T/CHiAZ53hx7NWwhUWFmu3g5qv6YYehZbtDGC2wCgX787dURFIjtdUz lS33xao1omZHJh+aqS7L8rDQY86FQoMeMdKMx5VwjfpmLy9JcDyTIZD2c3ND8c2HZAr1 8NSDfs+EFpmYdj7+T9wvzu4q39l5W+cA/jsIDC9VaPimcDTV+ZrzxYSkEhM4B2x5TrGe SJrWYnqSDbXnvDLhEPkhrSjEKBdj5L6Yg5we+pQ4za5a4HQKQ8+V0pkNbojUAvkEReYU qnUA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=qZP+qpoNhOWm8cCx370uDX3Sbkfn/dX0iX8el4xHGaA=; b=fQhR1Aqn2xJj3h5+Y/E3E0sAPNXj1pZPqeJjCZ/pLy3qAr6eVZLtCgpUwyXFa5KGeo D8fGNnXrrxF369o7Rni6JnGCkGC7+YiU42lljhlmPK/nqk4MNxLAmiP2D3BLM6b+VR1z +U2gYN/x18Xeo9OocMs4qOwXE6FrBdguA34IC4QV3pAHCccbNgC1VVyUVB0ziDYe/gDh CYoVrQWyPTSdJCtoUmHVsthM3GCLCAAqvQO5iRzIKpIdifCCBrqJ1eq168SrSnZQP16V fICDMSeZg3FA6iUbu7pFN0b5y5GMZ+Frv+wQFj28YhFypbUW3QNjz+QrDWNfwmXIxrT8 /ljQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALKqPwc67Fs1F9ZRaUxVfcnut7X+YNdm/on69feRMw6kytZ90bxhdyE6 m3K2odUlBbbD/esUIJnUKAQuzGLEtHW5UTNyh8Y=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AB8JxZrdTblxw59W2VgsQOkm1YmoNzNO+INvfF01L27ix2jnnHi1q2UuCgZ0kJK1ZCajLUVl7LhEGKYF6qiPZlDKBf8=
X-Received: by 2002:a9d:4a90:: with SMTP id i16-v6mr14894909otf.279.1526930939363; Mon, 21 May 2018 12:28:59 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.201.55.233 with HTTP; Mon, 21 May 2018 12:28:58 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <166DE121-4C1E-40EC-B7B6-6948BD1E2234@oracle.com>
References: <89A4F7ED-2658-492C-BDAC-02193C956C33@oracle.com> <CAKKJt-cZiLL-q-tm+h80S_BX85VNzdc+TKB8g9n-yJd5KP9aOA@mail.gmail.com> <CAFt6Bam_3Kz4+AwSxxaHY0OUedZd2Xob2KQU3cgPvDPwhbaQXg@mail.gmail.com> <A048F25C-0F85-4DCF-AABA-7578919B761B@oracle.com> <CADaq8jfAz=-GPxQia7j-0snFr-zaTaqD=pjhdScpiAfz8DbC0w@mail.gmail.com> <166DE121-4C1E-40EC-B7B6-6948BD1E2234@oracle.com>
From: David Noveck <davenoveck@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 21 May 2018 15:28:58 -0400
Message-ID: <CADaq8jdXY0ekeZDxBwCytQnDyo36oCTQVvBBqi-=C3abZ=h=dQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Chuck Lever <chuck.lever@oracle.com>
Cc: NFSv4 <nfsv4@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000003cc69c056cbc507b"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/nfsv4/QEQpRwrXGSEhtgeCgxUAwmU1F3I>
Subject: Re: [nfsv4] IETF 102 nfsv4 WG meeting go/no-go
X-BeenThere: nfsv4@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
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: Mon, 21 May 2018 19:29:03 -0000

Now for my agenda items:

> Road map for completing draft-ietf-nfsv4-mv0-trunking-update-00
> - 10 minutes, should follow discussion of nfsv4-migration-update,
> of course.

That would place you between a discussion of draft-ietf-nfsv4-migration-
issues-15
and draft-ietf-nfsv4-mv1-msns-update-00.   If you want to change the order,
we could do that.
I'm assuming that the discussion of the three drafts will take 45 minutes
as a whole.

I think there will need to be a review of where we are on our milestones.
 It appears I will be
a bit late on WGLC for draft-ietf-nfsv4-migration issues, but the other two
documents in that
group seem like they will be done in time.   I expect the discussion/review
of our remaining milestones
will take about fifteen minutes.

On Mon, May 21, 2018 at 12:57 PM, Chuck Lever <chuck.lever@oracle.com>
wrote:

>
>
> > On May 21, 2018, at 9:34 AM, David Noveck <davenoveck@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Go/No-go went by us on Friday.
> >
> > I had thought of Spencer's message as the as the Go/No-go (in this case
> Go).
> > My interpretation was that he requested a meeting based on his judgment
> > that there was a general feeling that we should meet.
>
> Spencer said:
> > I can cancel the meeting request if there is a lack of interest but we
> should make that decision soon (Monday or Tuesday at the latest).
>
>
> Which I took to mean that his request was provisional and that
> no decision on meeting had been confirmed.
>
> But now we are "go" so let me propose some topics I can lead:
>
> Integrity Management Architecture backgrounder
> - 15 minutes. I will submit a WG document before July 2 that
> replaces draft-cel-ietf-linux-seclabel-xtensions-00 with a
> mechanism that uses OPTIONAL GETATTR attributes instead of
> extending NFSv4 security labels.
>
> Road map for completing draft-ietf-nfsv4-mv0-trunking-update-00
> - 10 minutes, should follow discussion of nfsv4-migration-update,
> of course.
>
> RPC/RDMA credit accounting round table
> - 15 minutes. What needs to be fixed in RPC/RDMA credit
> accounting?
>
>
> > > I haven't heard any objections to meeting,
> >
> > Neither did  Spencer.
> >
> > > and there does seem to be a substantive list of topics
> > > we could discuss.
> >
> > We now have to turn that into a list of topics we will discuss and
> > divvy up the meeting time.
> >
> > > We appear to have enough energy behind meeting
> > > in Montreal in July.
> >
> > Yes. Now it's just a question of getting money, reservations, and plane
> tickets,
> > and getting presentations ready.
> >
> > On Mon, May 21, 2018 at 11:46 AM, Chuck Lever <chuck.lever@oracle.com>
> wrote:
> >
> >
> > > On May 11, 2018, at 3:42 PM, spencer shepler <
> spencer.shepler@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > As you will note, I have submitted a meeting request for IETF 102
> (Thanks for pushing the discussion this week, Chuck).
> >
> > Thank you for requesting the room!
> >
> > Go/No-go went by us on Friday. I haven't heard any objections to
> > meeting, and there does seem to be a substantive list of topics
> > we could discuss. We appear to have enough energy behind meeting
> > in Montreal in July.
> >
> >
> > > I wanted to get the meeting request in given the positive outlook and
> for the fact that hotel registration deadlines were approaching quickly.
> > >
> > > I can cancel the meeting request if there is a lack of interest but we
> should make that decision soon (Monday or Tuesday at the latest).
> > >
> > > Spencer
> > >
> > >
> > > On Wed, May 9, 2018 at 12:37 PM, Spencer Dawkins at IETF <
> spencerdawkins.ietf@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Without expressing an opinion about when WGs meet and do not meet
> (that's a WG decision), it might be worth me mentioning that it's extremely
> unlikely I would object to a virtual interim meeting for any of my WGs, and
> the TSV ADs have a dedicated WebEx bridge ... so if you need to talk, but
> not badly enough to meet face to face, you still have options.
> > >
> > > Do the right thing, of course!
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > >
> > > Spencer (D)
> > >
> > > On Mon, May 7, 2018 at 10:12 AM, Chuck Lever <chuck.lever@oracle.com>
> wrote:
> > > https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/important-dates/
> > >
> > > Says the cut-off for requesting a meeting room is June 1, 2018.
> > >
> > > I can think of a few agenda topics that are relevant at this time:
> > >
> > > - Tom/Trond have some virtualization-related extensions and other
> protocol fixups
> > > - I can give a backgrounder on the Integrity Measurement work I'm doing
> > > - Dave and I have the mv0 and mv1 trunking documents
> > > - Any other 2018 milestones, such as the expired pNFS SCSI NVMe layout
> I-D
> > > - RPC/RDMA credits: the road ahead
> > >
> > > That's not an exhaustive list, but it seems like critical mass already.
> > > Any other thoughts?
> > >
> > > Can we set a go/no-go decision date, say Friday May 18th?
>
> --
> Chuck Lever
>
>
>
>