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

[David Noveck <[e-mail]>]

> General: I don't expect a change in approach this late in the process,

Given that we have already gone through the working group process, making a
change at this point would occasion a significant delay.

> but I
> think the approach of this update (replacing, inserting, and updating
sections
> in the updated RFC) is pretty unfriendly to the readers.

On the othe hand, if we just produced an updated v4.0 section 8, the result
would be hard to review, in that you would force readers and reviewers to
diff old and new documents to see what has changed.

> This would make sense
> if we actually rendered patched versions of updated RFCs, but we do not.

We don't do so automatically or routinely but we do have the option to use
this document to produce an updated Section 8 for RFC7530.

> This
> leaves readers to flip back and forth to figure out the context of each
update.

I hope this is not too onerous

> §1: s/"which enables"/"that enables"

OK.  Will be in -04.

> §5.1 Does "updated introduction" to section 8.4 mean the same as "replaces
> section 8.4, but not it's subsections?"

Yes. I think we can make this clearer in -04 by updating the first
sub-bullet of the second bullet in Section 5.  It how reads:

Section 5.2.1 replaces the introductory material within Section 8.4 of
[RFC7530].

This could be replaced by:

Section 5.2.1 replaces the introductory material within Section 8.4 of
[RFC7530]*, *i.e., the material within that Section 8.4, exclusive of
subsections.


> §5.2.2 (and other sections that add a new subsection to 8.4). Are these
assumed
> to be inserted in a particular location under 8.4? That is, can you state
the
> new section numbers? Otherwise the reader is left to guess where these
would be
> inserted.

Will address in -04 by updating the material in the sub-bullets of the
second bullet within Section 5, to read as follows:


   - Section 5.2.2 is to be added as a new sub-section of Section 8.4
before the updated Section 8.4.1 of [RFC7530].  In a consolidated
document, it would appear as Section 8.4.1.


   - Section 5.2.3 is to be added as an additional new sub-section of
Section 8.4 before the updated Section 8.4.1 of [RFC7530]. In a
consolidated document, it would appear as Section 8.4.2.


   - Section 5.2.4 replaces Section 8.4.1 of [RFC7530], entitled "File
System Replication". In a consolidated document, it would appear as
Section 8.4.3.


   -  Section 5.2.5 replaces Section 8.4.2 of [RFC7530], entitled
"File System Migration".  In a consolidated document, it would appear
as Section 8.4.4.


   - Section 5.2.6 is to be added as a new sub-section of Section 8.4
before Section 8.4.3 of [RFC7530].   In a consolidated document, it
would appear as Section 8.4.4 while the existing Section 8.3 would
appear as Section 8.4.6.

> §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.

On Wed, Jan 9, 2019 at 5:00 PM Ben Campbell <[e-mail]> wrote:

> Ben Campbell has entered the following ballot position for
> draft-ietf-nfsv4-mv0-trunking-update-03: No Objection
>
> When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
> email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
> introductory paragraph, however.)
>
>
> Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html
> for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.
>
>
> The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-nfsv4-mv0-trunking-update/
>
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> COMMENT:
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> General: I don't expect a change in approach this late in the process, but
> I
> think the approach of this update (replacing, inserting, and updating
> sections
> in the updated RFC) is pretty unfriendly to the readers. This would make
> sense
> if we actually rendered patched versions of updated RFCs, but we do not.
> This
> leaves readers to flip back and forth to figure out the context of each
> update.
>
> §1: s/"which enables"/"that enables"
>
> §5.1 Does "updated introduction" to section 8.4 mean the same as "replaces
> section 8.4, but not it's subsections?"
>
> §5.2.2 (and other sections that add a new subsection to 8.4). Are these
> assumed
> to be inserted in a particular location under 8.4? That is, can you state
> the
> new section numbers? Otherwise the reader is left to guess where these
> would be
> inserted.
>
> §6: What is meant by "outside section 8"?
>
>
>