[nfsv4] [NFSv4.2] Meeting Minutes for 10/06/11
"Haynes, Tom" <Tom.Haynes@netapp.com> Thu, 06 October 2011 18:26 UTC
Return-Path: <Tom.Haynes@netapp.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 6E5D721F8E16 for <nfsv4@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 6 Oct 2011 11:26:23 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -10.443
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.443 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.155, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id luuagNVCZW0r for <nfsv4@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 6 Oct 2011 11:26:22 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx2.netapp.com (mx2.netapp.com [216.240.18.37]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C613D21F8E15 for <nfsv4@ietf.org>; Thu, 6 Oct 2011 11:26:22 -0700 (PDT)
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos; i="4.68,497,1312182000"; d="scan'208,217"; a="587317294"
Received: from smtp2.corp.netapp.com ([10.57.159.114]) by mx2-out.netapp.com with ESMTP; 06 Oct 2011 11:29:34 -0700
Received: from sacrsexc1-prd.hq.netapp.com (sacrsexc1-prd.hq.netapp.com [10.99.115.27]) by smtp2.corp.netapp.com (8.13.1/8.13.1/NTAP-1.6) with ESMTP id p96ITXgn004140 for <nfsv4@ietf.org>; Thu, 6 Oct 2011 11:29:34 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from VMWEXCEHT03-PRD.hq.netapp.com ([10.106.76.241]) by sacrsexc1-prd.hq.netapp.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Thu, 6 Oct 2011 11:29:29 -0700
Received: from VMWEXCEHT04-PRD.hq.netapp.com (10.106.77.34) by vmwexceht03-prd.hq.netapp.com (10.106.76.241) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.289.1; Thu, 6 Oct 2011 11:29:28 -0700
Received: from SACEXCMBX04-PRD.hq.netapp.com ([169.254.6.166]) by vmwexceht04-prd.hq.netapp.com ([10.106.77.34]) with mapi id 14.01.0289.001; Thu, 6 Oct 2011 11:29:29 -0700
From: "Haynes, Tom" <Tom.Haynes@netapp.com>
To: "nfsv4@ietf.org" <nfsv4@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [NFSv4.2] Meeting Minutes for 10/06/11
Thread-Index: AQHMhFXh+R4NCbamBkmct/fPEHw8SA==
Date: Thu, 06 Oct 2011 18:29:28 +0000
Message-ID: <0A041D89-F76F-4664-AE72-CFF8A952A80B@netapp.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.106.53.51]
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_0A041D89F76F4664AE72CFF8A952A80Bnetappcom_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 06 Oct 2011 18:29:29.0595 (UTC) FILETIME=[E29D54B0:01CC8455]
Subject: [nfsv4] [NFSv4.2] Meeting Minutes for 10/06/11
X-BeenThere: nfsv4@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
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: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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: Thu, 06 Oct 2011 18:26:23 -0000
Attendees -------------- - Tom Haynes (NetApp) - Mike Eisler (NetApp) - Manjunath Shankararao (NetApp) - Dean Hildebrand (IBM) - Trond Myklebust (NetApp) - Peter Staubach (EMC) - Rob Thurlow (Oracle) - Spencer Shepler (Microsoft) - Sorin Faibish (EMC) + IETF Note Well Agreement http://www.ietf.org/NOTEWELL.html + Taipei Under control + IO_ADVISE Mike to clarify that for sparse/dense, use the same offsets as READ and WRITE Dean to post a new draft after that When Dean and Mike agree on it, it comes into the NFSv4.2 draft and feedback then comes there. + SEEK Dean pointed out on the mailing list to avoid space maps. Trond pointed out short SEEKs. Tom will post a new XDR for this. + 3530isms OPEN SHARE - we will take this text retransmits - Spencer to review Section 3.1 netids - point to Mike's document 3.1 should to SHOULD for 2049 Universal port punt to 4.3 UDP: Tom proposed earlier: These requirements dictate UDP by itself MUST NOT be used as an NFSv4 transport. David Black proposed earlier: Because UDP does not meet the above requirements, UDP MUST NOT be used as an NFSv4 transport protocol. The sticker is "by itself", which is what 5661 states as well. We need to pick a sentence and go with it. + draft-faibish-nfsv4-pnfs-block-disk-protection-02.txt Spencer mentioned the plan is to turn this into a WG item and push for last call on it.
- [nfsv4] [NFSv4.2] Meeting Minutes for 10/06/11 Haynes, Tom