Re: [nfsv4] I-D Action: draft-ietf-nfsv4-rpcrdma-version-two-01.txt

Chuck Lever <chucklever@gmail.com> Fri, 17 January 2020 18:32 UTC

Return-Path: <chucklever@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 C4980120043 for <nfsv4@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 17 Jan 2020 10:32:13 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.998
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.998 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, 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 g7NiTRCKuYOE for <nfsv4@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 17 Jan 2020 10:32:08 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-yb1-xb32.google.com (mail-yb1-xb32.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::b32]) (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 BB419120025 for <nfsv4@ietf.org>; Fri, 17 Jan 2020 10:32:08 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-yb1-xb32.google.com with SMTP id x18so6301872ybk.6 for <nfsv4@ietf.org>; Fri, 17 Jan 2020 10:32:08 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=from:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:subject:date:references :to:in-reply-to:message-id; bh=lJzdKdZvwKzUz6WmIXQMjq1iN1Hn+3HZg9LHBtXvvtg=; b=dYDD7cx3eA3dLkhYi3wDer+RxgohYm4OK1bJPlXoH3JsWXqPZRXGjxNOBwCWbg4KCg 2YhGsR5fM3iY4kOoZozOOVSiYMoPykbTyY0fFydTVI2Eh+Kn8vRju8ZtgKevKnlWCzc+ 0conjbTsKsvgR4fd1bIa4WTuA/5fnt7K3/SrWpvohfK96sQE1Oeo3IJJGwryvbUCVHmM jpdKK7VJAYzaBBxg51bDLA30LV2lefEHO1wyPWARCxYWLImneVvqmX67hDhIUuB69TLx RJHI8vqcF3Ci9uCF2y+og6WkSTRDsaov2zFxq774XAnRqZwAvpDG+mp0vUYac5WNMaDO WOkg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version :subject:date:references:to:in-reply-to:message-id; bh=lJzdKdZvwKzUz6WmIXQMjq1iN1Hn+3HZg9LHBtXvvtg=; b=EbX12WnmWu3f+HbEJR6vQE/Tb6Xv8Weas+EvXeGLu6j6UxyFVTpt0RFaw03MopDvKr DevD7i1MeoEnDtDkqBMZW180uOUbWPqnnAPYlGqqQe7PSuTQvj8j3mUtVk6qPcEc7W4F JXuMU1PxsRj3O6UGh0zlJQRaLWoenaSXOrTMOfFyUU/467Kx74Ac7WP9H3byJ1VvBziL M3YRUzuMcoHycJPiHZRGHL3we2pmsAVLaisp7xVPw3XMwwo2sA3wdgxsYBJah7w0XZY2 euj7BLB7YgbPj7AJOsou4Al3t0KyXPI9fexPK59SrpKNCEEfW3Uwz5FyBBvUnSZkZ3xg 2czQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAUOBKl3Jd/Fym9awMXQlp2KBIj/82al7z3R4wfd5ITzyCyPuHJ4 eODJX8YtuN6pDUx61y2+P9N4O7s+
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqx6yCIVs6lucV34l81B60RXXPCajBWoifDFgztoYQsvN3I31qXiizJLHTmyu76jpBEBrZrtSQ==
X-Received: by 2002:a25:c784:: with SMTP id w126mr30447360ybe.14.1579285927694; Fri, 17 Jan 2020 10:32:07 -0800 (PST)
Received: from anon-dhcp-152.1015granger.net (c-68-61-232-219.hsd1.mi.comcast.net. [68.61.232.219]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id b76sm12048493ywb.77.2020.01.17.10.32.06 for <nfsv4@ietf.org> (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Fri, 17 Jan 2020 10:32:07 -0800 (PST)
From: Chuck Lever <chucklever@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 12.4 \(3445.104.11\))
Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2020 13:32:06 -0500
References: <157928469071.20252.13837444549128984673@ietfa.amsl.com>
To: NFSv4 <nfsv4@ietf.org>
In-Reply-To: <157928469071.20252.13837444549128984673@ietfa.amsl.com>
Message-Id: <C3A49FC7-6279-4721-B639-5832442345DD@gmail.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.104.11)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/nfsv4/j_UdnaZK07DemgD5EijjvfYg_ZM>
Subject: Re: [nfsv4] I-D Action: draft-ietf-nfsv4-rpcrdma-version-two-01.txt
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, 17 Jan 2020 18:32:14 -0000

Hello-

> On Jan 17, 2020, at 1:11 PM, internet-drafts@ietf.org wrote:
> 
> 
> A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories.
> This draft is a work item of the Network File System Version 4 WG of the IETF.
> 
>        Title           : RPC-over-RDMA Version 2 Protocol
>        Authors         : Charles Lever
>                          David Noveck
> 	Filename        : draft-ietf-nfsv4-rpcrdma-version-two-01.txt
> 	Pages           : 83
> 	Date            : 2020-01-17
> 
> Abstract:
>   This document specifies the second version of a transport protocol
>   that conveys Remote Procedure Call (RPC) messages using Remote Direct
>   Memory Access (RDMA).  This version of the protocol is extensible.
> 
> 
> The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is:
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-nfsv4-rpcrdma-version-two/
> 
> There are also htmlized versions available at:
> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-nfsv4-rpcrdma-version-two-01
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-nfsv4-rpcrdma-version-two-01
> 
> A diff from the previous version is available at:
> https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-nfsv4-rpcrdma-version-two-01
> 
> 
> Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission
> until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org.
> 
> Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at:
> ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/

This is a substantially expanded revision of rpcrdma-version-two.
Changes include:

"Short" and "Long" messages have been renamed to encourage
implementers not to think only of RPC message size when choosing
how to convey an RPC message. Also, the discussion now has to
distinguish between using PZRs and Reply chunks v. Message
Continuation for messages that do not fit inline. The new term
is Payload Format. See Section 4.4.

A complete discussion of reverse-direction operation has been
merged into the document. See Section 4.5 and others.

A new section on error handling has been added. The section
fully describes each error and appropriate recovery behaviors
for Requesters and Responders. See Section 7.

The use of compliance keywords is more thrifty throughout.

The text has been thoroughly revised to make it easier to read
by reviewers and implementers.

I've attempted to address editor's notes, although some new ones
have appeared ( [ cel: .... ] ).

The document is now north of 80 pages, even though I'm watching
carefully for redundant text and sections that can be removed.
However the authors believe the proposed protocol is now close
to being feature-complete.


--
Chuck Lever
chucklever@gmail.com