IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [nfsv4] Proposed charter changes (with updates)

Tom Talpey <tom@talpey.com> Fri, 05 June 2020 12:15 UTC

Return-Path: <tom@talpey.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 ED15A3A0CF3 for <nfsv4@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 5 Jun 2020 05:15:36 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.897
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.897 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 Sk3ZNJp5euLy for <nfsv4@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 5 Jun 2020 05:15:36 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from p3plsmtpa07-02.prod.phx3.secureserver.net (p3plsmtpa07-02.prod.phx3.secureserver.net [173.201.192.231]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0A7D43A090B for <nfsv4@ietf.org>; Fri, 5 Jun 2020 05:15:36 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.0.78] ([24.218.182.144]) by :SMTPAUTH: with ESMTPSA id hBG3jJoKlEHrKhBG3jr41I; Fri, 05 Jun 2020 05:15:35 -0700
X-CMAE-Analysis: v=2.3 cv=C+qXNjH+ c=1 sm=1 tr=0 a=ugQcCzLIhEHbLaAUV45L0A==:117 a=ugQcCzLIhEHbLaAUV45L0A==:17 a=N659UExz7-8A:10 a=48vgC7mUAAAA:8 a=8IU-hZBj3aM0WQYaofcA:9 a=pILNOxqGKmIA:10 a=w1C3t2QeGrPiZgrLijVG:22
X-SECURESERVER-ACCT: tom@talpey.com
To: nfsv4@ietf.org
References: <CADaq8jfgREzCvi=rZk4tEg8uLnA2mDeeQF0drC9kWrL11JH4Sg@mail.gmail.com> <4a88fddce55d78d1b64fc0a4f6d71d910bb7ada2.camel@ericsson.com> <MN2PR00MB068665937287B4AF541F8A3EA0880@MN2PR00MB0686.namprd00.prod.outlook.com> <6d9f4bb4c0c0661841f38940fe0b4a71893764fa.camel@ericsson.com> <MN2PR00MB06861C2E6C2982BC2C39A3FAA0880@MN2PR00MB0686.namprd00.prod.outlook.com> <CADaq8jcQpxAYqWk3RigviVFq4rauMx9Q8QPEQKf+UQWmm2hbJw@mail.gmail.com> <CADaq8jfAz1_hck2txuPt8jmCGjysknWfrk_9SaPPWjEGQZkDyw@mail.gmail.com> <019be9c15328961d7950add1b2a191a7e9bf3b89.camel@ericsson.com> <1EE87C51-9D97-4AB5-AEFD-962298FA8AC7@eggert.org>
From: Tom Talpey <tom@talpey.com>
Message-ID: <005dbafa-cd3d-5de1-2b10-7edaf2e57205@talpey.com>
Date: Fri, 05 Jun 2020 08:15:35 -0400
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.8.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <1EE87C51-9D97-4AB5-AEFD-962298FA8AC7@eggert.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"; format="flowed"
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-CMAE-Envelope: MS4wfC1vaMrxUtEnmHrDXrkPAlJdkwnkFnljN4/giSDKmsQeKdtdKStXQWmUW3Mp0CFsxdSVFdQ0wuYbkHqT4KPK94p5uVy2q3Ze8SbzgTT3Btr7b6Yq3K+p n7xCM+9XVqhQRI06VAZjfYiyem6jj1EvmhWaTpxLlVGSZxGTtHm2Q4Pr
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/nfsv4/XW3TiWuEnNQuV-4IvnrAgVDnP2E>
Subject: Re: [nfsv4] Proposed charter changes (with updates)
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: Fri, 05 Jun 2020 12:15:37 -0000

On 6/5/2020 3:25 AM, Lars Eggert wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> On 2020-6-5, at 10:23, Magnus Westerlund <magnus.westerlund=40ericsson.com@dmarc.ietf.org> wrote:
>> For that reason I would recommend that one work through the technical proposal
>> to better understand what desired propoerties of RDMA over QUIC has, as well as
>> what is required to realize those from QUIC. Then one can likely make a good
>> decision if that work should be done in QUIC WG or in this or another WG.
> 
> +1
> 
> An initial individual draft would be very useful in triaging where the best place for this work would be.

So, to be clear I was describing a process for a potential
NFSv4-over-QUIC binding, not an RDMA-over-QUIC one. Although,
I have been thinking about both.

I'd like to get the RDMA Push Mode extension draft process
through the knothole before considering the next one. :-)

Tom.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email