Re: [nfsv4] High-priority items for discussion at IETF 105, take 2
spencer shepler <spencer.shepler@gmail.com> Tue, 02 July 2019 17:24 UTC
Return-Path: <spencer.shepler@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 E79B71206BE for <nfsv4@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 2 Jul 2019 10:24:05 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.997
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.997 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, URIBL_BLOCKED=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 3CTNJEVNu5ra for <nfsv4@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 2 Jul 2019 10:24:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-lj1-x22a.google.com (mail-lj1-x22a.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::22a]) (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 D90E41206B3 for <nfsv4@ietf.org>; Tue, 2 Jul 2019 10:24:01 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-lj1-x22a.google.com with SMTP id h10so17755772ljg.0 for <nfsv4@ietf.org>; Tue, 02 Jul 2019 10:24:01 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=EkBy3EjvSgpc2ClkUsLwvYltcPzxFbSXtZTwUZq+2js=; b=gCkXtpwTazOI/Lw+XJHwAn1BaQn40YvdpRcRiADxDFHt6EI/OWdPUcAFla9zkZ3pyX W9NnDHvrp5HUMwBkTXuUAQFmdXJWAIWem1Rt+g6LwQgZorakTlzh1hYdctBk26uwQj96 kUtoJdIVJMAhnZN+/XYkO27Fi4e7SQfUzQji9S0rlYwOeKBFCpTVyhoPxG+vxG+9I7zx itAq1VoLUUBxLD5P/GLWrb48wusjzP77LNleJGk5e5GHv4xAjtnNlWQmu+OYu/2vjBLx XHDSn4HPvgg1InpqWrP3ZAc/ICN+NFuoLRnS/NLxsCIQYVxTWopcr3f73TocB+0UjcyP 74Iw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=EkBy3EjvSgpc2ClkUsLwvYltcPzxFbSXtZTwUZq+2js=; b=JsPmhmra3qaknK40wLoQbDiggWGT6EaB5ZcbHilyFjiSQ4OTVTBEfK1+Gap/29GAAj GOtNVbnyskpHeYvftYXJAQGU5SG639CMaTueBtZZ+A9cQ6aRHpO/zdaRWUR6kpjbRxKk HNLxIsICCDxwtNdbADeY+Xz9mm+PV1Q8aC+RwXd7eAV6wCBaS7tzOqv59q3ETvWcV0Z4 +OAGiIVA5kMyB6J97AuFNHmLeMyNfPruyABPPHFnOg04wJ/Gik8HE1JsE6U7yaRXEr2U nDXGbu/FsnhDRMVa4KhuFJqfMWCZEmjy/fenFwkHBnPbbMck5VMR5WtEASnuMGF0PmOC TWgQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAWVqeUbEWvxybGMEcJVu0+pvo6r27nZ/WjurfcJsloqAi1rwit3 R9k8qc7wi97sgferiedT71fdvG35XUK2eYnrNRk=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqwAvgsNowlnoUIIFU1Ngk+1djXRiDllX6ZRvudo9KJvkmi8dCRQ0Ib3E9r+0LJhjRYSmW4Lyu8IPcEgMavC6wc=
X-Received: by 2002:a2e:9a58:: with SMTP id k24mr18034848ljj.165.1562088240125; Tue, 02 Jul 2019 10:24:00 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CADaq8jdjRyMD_im_3T7VPPX8T3FzCfL+bXsso8Bnz01aks88Nw@mail.gmail.com> <A8575F78-4307-48FB-BE7D-222FE4A9CC8F@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <A8575F78-4307-48FB-BE7D-222FE4A9CC8F@gmail.com>
From: spencer shepler <spencer.shepler@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 02 Jul 2019 13:23:47 -0400
Message-ID: <CAFt6Ba=4BjMF5Fr0dce5E7fDXOq4u9T1S-AKcubx_rwqM5oaww@mail.gmail.com>
To: Tom Haynes <loghyr@gmail.com>
Cc: David Noveck <davenoveck@gmail.com>, NFSv4 <nfsv4@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000a91fbe058cb6024e"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/nfsv4/UEI06QMwnxphgdUf67s0LSt8jZw>
Subject: Re: [nfsv4] High-priority items for discussion at IETF 105, take 2
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, 02 Jul 2019 17:24:11 -0000
Thanks everyone. I am vacation this week but will pull things together once I am back. Spencer On Tue, Jul 2, 2019 at 12:19 PM Tom Haynes <loghyr@gmail.com> wrote: > Hmm, I also asked for presentation time…. > > > > On Jul 1, 2019, at 12:23 PM, David Noveck <davenoveck@gmail.com> wrote: > > Although we have decided to meet in Montreal, have a (two-hour) session > scheduled, and Chuck and I have sent lists of proposed topics to the group, > we need to get an agenda together for the meeting. Chuck and I have > discussed what we feel are the high-priority topics for discusion at the > meeting. I previously sent out an incomplete preliminary agenda. Since > then, there have been a few updates, so I'm sending the updated list of > items. In any case, we still need to hear from: > > - Anyone who knows of additional high-priority items to be added the > list. > - Anyone who feels that we should *not *be talking about any of the > items currently on the list > > It looks like there will be additional time available. If people have > worthwhile items to discuss that are not high-priority, they should send > messages to the list and assess interest. If there are too many to fit, > the working group can express its priorities. If we still wind up with > available time when IETF105 rolls around, we can open up the meeting for > whatever people would like to bring up. > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > *Agenda Bashing -- All -- 5 min..* > > *Current updates* *to NFSv4 spec -- D. Noveck -- 20 min.* > > This will cover the following documents > > - RFC8587 (*NFS Version 4.0 Trunking Update*): It makes sense to > discuss this together with the document below since the trunking-related > updates for both NFSv4.0 and NFSv4.1 are pretty much the same, even though > one is cuurrently an RFC, while the other will probably not be when we meet. > - draft-ietf-nfsv4-rfc5661sesqui-msns (*Network File System (NFS) > Version 4 Minor Version 1 Protocol*): This provides updates to NFSv4.1 > dealing with trunking and transparent state migration. There will be a > discussion regarding the state of the approval/publication process. > > *Review of Current Working group Milestones -- D. Noveck -- 20 min.* > > This will cover all of our current miilestones. In two cases, the > milestones gave already been achieved. > > There are six items that have not yet been achieved that still need to be > discussed: > > - Submit final document describing use of NVMe in accessing a pNFS > SCSI Layout (as Proposed Standard) > > No current document but still has working group interest. Probably should > not be a milestone. Need a plan to go forward with this. > > > - Submit Final documents descibing NFSv4.1 trunking discovery and > NFSv4.1 Transpaent state migration (two milestones neing addressed by one > document) > > This is now addressed in the working group document, draft-ietf-nfsv4-rfc5661sesqui-msns > (*Network File System (NFS) Version 4 Minor Version 1 Protocol*):. > Discussed in detail in another talk. > > > - Submit final document describing CM private data convention for > RPC-over-RDMA version 1 (Informational) > > This is now a working group document draft-ietf-nfsv4-rpcrdma-cm-pvt-data (*RDMA > Connection Manager Private Data For RPC-Over-RDMA Version 1*). It is on > its way to IESG consideration. > > > - Submit final document describing RDMA Layout for pNFS. > > No current document but still has working group interest. Possibly should > not be a milestone. Need a plan to go forward with this. > > > - Submit final document defining RPC-over-RDMA Version 2 (as Proposed > Standard) > > This is now an I-D, draft-cel-nfsv4-rpcrdma-version-two (*RPC-over-RMA > Version Two Protocol*). This will be discussed in one of the additional > talks. > > *RPC-TLS and related security work -- C.Lever -- 15 min.* > > This will be primarily focused on draft-etf-nfsv4-rpc-tls (*Remote > Procedure Call Encryption by Deafault)* but we also want to discuss the > potential need for other documents such as an NFSv4-focused document and > documents relating to QUIC. > > *Moving Forward on Integrity Measurement Draft -- C. Lever -- 10 min.* > > Time for discussion of the future of > draft-ietf-nfsv4-integrity-measurement (*Integrity Measurement for > Network File System version 4*) and possible objection/issues with that > draft. > > *RPC-over-RDMA Version 2 -- C. Lever -- 10 min.* > > Discussion of current atatus and what is necessary to go forward with this > document. > > *Proposed Plans for rfc5661bis -- D. Noveck -- 15 min.* > > Will discuss updates that need to be done to provide a reasonably current > description of NFSv4.1. The assumption is that the bis RFC document will > be based on draft-ietf-nfsv4-rfc5661-msns-update (*NFS Version 4.1 > Update for Multi-Server Namespace*) coverted, as the IESG appears to > want, into a bis-like format but that the following additional changes > would need to be added: > > - Updates to reflect the changes Tom made to pNFS mapping type > requirements in RFC8434. > - Changes to avoid the NFSv4.1 specification contradicting RFC8178. > - A new internationalization section modeled on that in RFC7530 > - A new Security Considerations section that meets the requirements of > RFC3552 and reflect the changes/advances made my the security work now > underway. > - Current erratta. > - Anything else people think needs to be fixed in the NFSv4.1 > specification. > > We can also consider alternate plans to provide more current NFSv4.1 > specification documents. > > _____________________________________________________________________________ > > I'd like to mention that, for those unable to be in Montreal on the week > of 7/20, remote participation will be available, even for people who want > to present a talk. Time zones can be a drag, but it is well worth > considering remote presentation if you have something you think the working > group needs to hear. > _______________________________________________ > nfsv4 mailing list > nfsv4@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nfsv4 > > > _______________________________________________ > nfsv4 mailing list > nfsv4@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nfsv4 >
- [nfsv4] High-priority items for discussion at IET… David Noveck
- Re: [nfsv4] High-priority items for discussion at… Faibish.Sorin
- Re: [nfsv4] High-priority items for discussion at… Tom Haynes
- Re: [nfsv4] High-priority items for discussion at… spencer shepler
- Re: [nfsv4] High-priority items for discussion at… Faibish.Sorin
- Re: [nfsv4] High-priority items for discussion at… Faibish.Sorin
- Re: [nfsv4] High-priority items for discussion at… David Noveck
- Re: [nfsv4] High-priority items for discussion at… spencer shepler