Re: [nfsv4] Potential charter update - removal of "use of NVMe in accessing a pNFS SCSI Layout" work item

[spencer shepler <[e-mail]>]

Sorin,

It would be helpful to have access to some of these ideas prior to a
presentation at the meeting.  Email or a short, personal I-D would be
preferred so that we can see how it fits into the overall agenda.

Spencer

On Mon, May 20, 2019 at 11:20 AM faibish, sorin <[e-mail]>
wrote:

> Spencer,
>
>
>
> If the agenda is not closed yet I would like 10 minutes to discuss new
> attributes for data reduction. Just slides presenting the problem and few
> ways to address it. It could bridge into the pNFS SCSI but only indirectly
> as the purpose of the new attributes are referring to NVMe. Please let me
> know if I can get 10 min. thanks
>
>
>
> ./Sorin
>
>
>
> *From:* nfsv4 <[e-mail]> *On Behalf Of * spencer shepler
> *Sent:* Monday, May 20, 2019 12:38 PM
> *To:* Chuck Lever
> *Cc:* NFSv4
> *Subject:* Re: [nfsv4] Potential charter update - removal of "use of NVMe
> in accessing a pNFS SCSI Layout" work item
>
>
>
> [EXTERNAL EMAIL]
>
>
>
> Since it has been 18 months the expiration, etc., I just want to be
> realistic about keeping it as a WG milestone.
>
>
>
> The work can certainly continue and we can readapt the milestones - just
> doing some housecleaning.
>
>
>
> Spencer
>
>
>
>
>
> On Mon, May 20, 2019 at 9:03 AM Chuck Lever <[e-mail]>
> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On May 20, 2019, at 12:01 PM, Benjamin Coddington <[e-mail]>
> wrote:
> >
> > On 20 May 2019, at 11:54, Chuck Lever wrote:
> >
> >>> On May 20, 2019, at 11:46 AM, spencer shepler <
> [e-mail]>
> >>> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> I would prefer that we discuss and close on as many of the outstanding
> >>> discussions via the alias - prior to the face to face meeting.
> >>
> >> My understanding is that the author intends to revive the document when
> he
> >> has the resources to complete it. There has been no movement here
> recently
> >> and the author has allowed the document to expire.
> >>
> >> However we have discussed the topic at every IETF meeting for the past
> few
> >> years because there is still plenty of interest in seeing it completed.
> We
> >> agreed to leave the item on the charter as a placeholder.
> >>
> >> Perhaps it is a topic that is not appropriate as a milestone. Somehow we
> >> should document the WG's continued interest in this area. Any
> suggestions?
> >
> > I'm interested in picking up work on NVMe access for pNFS SCSI Layouts.
> >
> > What would be the practical result of removing this work item from the
> > milestone list?
>
> For a prototype implementation, probably nothing. You can still communicate
> any interesting findings to the document author or the Working Group.
>
>
> --
> Chuck Lever
>
>
>