IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [nfsv4] Ben Campbell's No Objection on draft-ietf-nfsv4-mv0-trunking-update-03: (with COMMENT)

Ben Campbell <ben@nostrum.com> Wed, 16 January 2019 17:46 UTC

Return-Path: <ben@nostrum.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 11061124BF6; Wed, 16 Jan 2019 09:46:53 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.679
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.679 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_INVALID=0.1, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, T_SPF_HELO_PERMERROR=0.01, T_SPF_PERMERROR=0.01] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=fail (1024-bit key) reason="fail (message has been altered)" header.d=nostrum.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 wQsskEbHARBG; Wed, 16 Jan 2019 09:46:51 -0800 (PST)
Received: from nostrum.com (raven-v6.nostrum.com [IPv6:2001:470:d:1130::1]) (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 85CFC124BE5; Wed, 16 Jan 2019 09:46:51 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [10.0.1.45] (cpe-70-122-203-106.tx.res.rr.com [70.122.203.106]) (authenticated bits=0) by nostrum.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPSA id x0GHkla1074364 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128 verify=NO); Wed, 16 Jan 2019 11:46:48 -0600 (CST) (envelope-from ben@nostrum.com)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=nostrum.com; s=default; t=1547660809; bh=ZQ2K6s2StJ+AuAbAcC9xvA67lAh1usSWBw+9/ywQOfs=; h=From:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:Cc:To:References; b=nL4Oe7RQ4lag5iXXGGXLqOtWl/GtKCVxtTn0eUxh2/S4pQ4ts/ZZcvuA6T7IRCOvV x+ikNJzqauefPuA8PEJbEsZpDZc4IcGxD0O9Yroidymvl7GB2UDbW8CdnpaRi1YVl0 Ya+ClGqCjsHw2RAFp8qoi3hG1dYbohqnnOVk35PU=
X-Authentication-Warning: raven.nostrum.com: Host cpe-70-122-203-106.tx.res.rr.com [70.122.203.106] claimed to be [10.0.1.45]
From: Ben Campbell <ben@nostrum.com>
Message-Id: <63F5C7D3-780B-4CAC-A64D-840B7E2721BF@nostrum.com>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_9633087D-8CF1-40AB-9F3F-BD8279F16FFB"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg="pgp-sha512"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 12.2 \(3445.102.3\))
Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2019 11:46:46 -0600
In-Reply-To: <CADaq8jcfqYrGcdLiyav7zPhjkyVriRJa9jVbGcNSz=ONyduJWA@mail.gmail.com>
Cc: The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>, draft-ietf-nfsv4-mv0-trunking-update@ietf.org, Spencer Shepler <spencer.shepler@gmail.com>, nfsv4-chairs@ietf.org, NFSv4 <nfsv4@ietf.org>
To: David Noveck <davenoveck@gmail.com>
References: <154707125334.5133.10041618200972102440.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <CADaq8jcfqYrGcdLiyav7zPhjkyVriRJa9jVbGcNSz=ONyduJWA@mail.gmail.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.102.3)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/nfsv4/Zx5DtjycvpLAmqW7BVReJ5hLj3g>
Subject: Re: [nfsv4] Ben Campbell's No Objection on draft-ietf-nfsv4-mv0-trunking-update-03: (with 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, 16 Jan 2019 17:46:53 -0000


> On Jan 16, 2019, at 11:38 AM, David Noveck <davenoveck@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> > §6: What is meant by "outside section 8"?
> 
> I assume you are referring to the title of Section 6.  It is referring to changes necessary in parts of [RFC7530] ouside of Section 8 of that document.  Not sure how to make this clearer.  Would appreciate any suggestions you might have.
> 

Nevermind; I see I misread the first paragraph last time. There is no confusion in the text.

Thanks!

Ben.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email