[rddp] STORM BOF time
Black_David@emc.com Wed, 11 March 2009 23:34 UTC
Return-Path: <Black_David@emc.com>
X-Original-To: rddp@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: rddp@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E9C3F3A67DB; Wed, 11 Mar 2009 16:34:17 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id q8gVjKR-eWqv; Wed, 11 Mar 2009 16:34:16 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mexforward.lss.emc.com (mexforward.lss.emc.com [128.222.32.20]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A9AA63A67D4; Wed, 11 Mar 2009 16:34:16 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from hop04-l1d11-si04.isus.emc.com (HOP04-L1D11-SI04.isus.emc.com [10.254.111.24]) by mexforward.lss.emc.com (Switch-3.2.5/Switch-3.1.7) with ESMTP id n2BNYqTH001631 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Wed, 11 Mar 2009 19:34:52 -0400 (EDT)
From: Black_David@emc.com
Received: from mailhub.lss.emc.com (numailhub.lss.emc.com [10.254.144.15]) by hop04-l1d11-si04.isus.emc.com (Tablus Interceptor); Wed, 11 Mar 2009 19:34:49 -0400
Received: from corpussmtp3.corp.emc.com (corpussmtp3.corp.emc.com [10.254.64.53]) by mailhub.lss.emc.com (Switch-3.3.2mp/Switch-3.3.2mp) with ESMTP id n2BNYmRu016234; Wed, 11 Mar 2009 19:34:48 -0400
Received: from CORPUSMX80A.corp.emc.com ([10.254.89.202]) by corpussmtp3.corp.emc.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Wed, 11 Mar 2009 19:34:47 -0400
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Date: Wed, 11 Mar 2009 19:34:47 -0400
Message-ID: <9FA859626025B64FBC2AF149D97C944A01F736BF@CORPUSMX80A.corp.emc.com>
In-reply-to: <9FA859626025B64FBC2AF149D97C944A01F736BA@CORPUSMX80A.corp.emc.com>
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
Thread-Topic: STORM BOF time
Thread-Index: AcmioQqSkUT1te6rS+uCXVPIvobxAQAALMaQ
X-Priority: 1
Priority: Urgent
Importance: high
References: <9FA859626025B64FBC2AF149D97C944A01F736BA@CORPUSMX80A.corp.emc.com>
To: ips@ietf.org, rddp@ietf.org
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 11 Mar 2009 23:34:47.0891 (UTC) FILETIME=[F7483A30:01C9A2A1]
X-EMM-EM: Active
Cc: imss@ietf.org, Black_David@emc.com
Subject: [rddp] STORM BOF time
X-BeenThere: rddp@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: "IETF Remote Direct Data Placement \(rddp\) WG" <rddp.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rddp>, <mailto:rddp-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/rddp>
List-Post: <mailto:rddp@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:rddp-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rddp>, <mailto:rddp-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 11 Mar 2009 23:34:18 -0000
I put everything in there except the meeting time. Try this: THURSDAY, March 26, 2009 *** 0900-1130 Morning Session I *** Continental 1&2 TSV storm Storage Maintenance BOF Sorry, --David > -----Original Message----- > From: Black, David > Sent: Wednesday, March 11, 2009 7:28 PM > To: ips@ietf.org; rddp@ietf.org > Cc: imss@ietf.org; Black, David > Subject: Storage Maintenance (storm) BOF reminder & requests > Importance: High > > This is a reminder that the Storage Maintenance BOF will > be held in about 2 weeks at the IETF meetings in San Francisco. > Please plan to attend if you're interested: > > THURSDAY, March 26, 2009 > Continental 1&2 TSV storm Storage Maintenance BOF > > The BOF description is at: > http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ips/current/msg02669.html > > The initial agenda is here: > http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ips/current/msg02670.html > > I'm going to go upload that initial agenda as the BOF agenda, > and it can be bashed at the meeting. > > The primary purpose of this BOF is to answer two questions: > (1) What storage maintenance work (IP Storage, Remote Direct > Data Placement) should be done? > (2) Should an IETF Working Group be formed to undertake that > work? > > Everyone gets to weigh in on these decisions, even those who > can't attend the BOF meeting. Anyone who thinks that there is > work that should be done, and who cannot come to the BOF meeting > should say so on the IPS or RDDP mailing lists (and it'd be a > good idea for those who can come to do this). As part of the > email, please indicate how you're interested in helping (author > or co-author of specific drafts, promise to review and comment > on specific drafts). > > Here's a summary of the initial draft list of work items: > - iSCSI: Combine RFCs into one document, removing unused features. > - iSCSI: Interoperability report on what has been implemented and > interoperates in support of Draft Standard status for iSCSI. > - iSCSI: Add backwards-compatible features to support SAM-4. > - iFCP: The Address Translation mode of iFCP needs to be deprecated. > - RDDP MPA: Small startup update for MPI application support. > - iSER: A few minor updates based on InfiniBand experience. > > Additional work (e.g., updated/improved iSNS for iSCSI, MIB changes, > updated ipsec security profile [i.e., IKEv2-based]) is possible if > there's interest. > > There are (at least) four possible outcomes: > (A) None of this work needs to be done. > (B) There are some small work items that make sense. Individual > drafts with a draft shepherd (i.e., David Black) will > suffice. > (C) A working group is needed to undertake more complex work > items and reach consensus on design issues. The WG can > be "virtual" and operate mostly via the mailing list > until/unless controversial/contentious issues arise. > (D) There is a lot of complex work that is needed, and a WG > that will plan to meet at every IETF meeting should be > formed. > > Please note that the IETF "rough consensus" process requires a > working group in practice to be effective. This makes outcome > (C) look attractive to me, as: > - I'm coming under increasing pressure to limit travel, and > the next two IETF meetings after San Francisco are not > in the US. > - I'd rather have the "rough consensus" process available and > not need it than need it and not have it available. > > Setting an example for how to express interest ... > > --------------- > I think that the iSCSI single RFC and interoperability report are > good ideas, but I want to see a bunch of people expressing interest > in these, as significant effort is involved. It might make sense > to do the single iSCSI RFC but put off the interoperability report > (the resulting RFC would remain at Proposed Standard rather than > going to Draft Standard), as I'm not hearing about major iSCSI > interoperability issues. > > I think the latter four items (SAM-4 for iSCSI, deprecate iFCP > address translation, MPI fix to MPA and iSER fixes) should all > be done. > > I plan to author the iFCP address translation deprecation draft, > and review all other drafts. > > I think that a virtual WG should be formed that plans to do its > work primarily via the mailing list. I believe the SAM-4 work > by itself is complex enough to need a working group - I would > expect design issues to turn up at least there and in determining > whether to remove certain iSCSI features, but I'm cautiously > optimistic that the mailing list is sufficient to work these > issues out (and concerned that travel restrictions are likely to > force use of the mailing list). > > ----------------- > > Ok, who wants to go next? > > Thanks, > --David > ---------------------------------------------------- > David L. Black, Distinguished Engineer > EMC Corporation, 176 South St., Hopkinton, MA 01748 > +1 (508) 293-7953 FAX: +1 (508) 293-7786 > black_david@emc.com Mobile: +1 (978) 394-7754 > ---------------------------------------------------- >
- [rddp] Storage Maintenance (storm) BOF reminder &… Black_David
- [rddp] STORM BOF time Black_David
- Re: [rddp] Storage Maintenance (storm) BOF remind… Stephen Bailey
- Re: [rddp] [Ips] Storage Maintenance (storm) BOF … Julian Satran
- Re: [rddp] [Ips] Storage Maintenance (storm) BOF … Lars Eggert
- Re: [rddp] [Ips] Storage Maintenance (storm) BOF … Knight, Frederick
- Re: [rddp] [Ips] Storage Maintenance (storm) BOF … Mallikarjun C.
- Re: [rddp] [Ips] Storage Maintenance (storm) BOF … Robert D. Russell
- Re: [rddp] [Junk released by Allow List] Re: [Ips… Felix Marti
- Re: [rddp] [Junk released by Allow List] Re: [Ips… Mikkel Hagen
- Re: [rddp] [Ips] Storage Maintenance (storm) BOF … Bernard Metzler
- Re: [rddp] [Ips] Storage Maintenance (storm) BOF … Caitlin Bestler
- Re: [rddp] [Ips] Storage Maintenance (storm) BOF … Caitlin Bestler
- Re: [rddp] Storage Maintenance (storm) BOF remind… Uri Elzur
- Re: [rddp] [Ips] Storage Maintenance (storm) BOF … Robert D. Russell
- Re: [rddp] Storage Maintenance (storm) BOF remind… Fredy Neeser
- Re: [rddp] Storage Maintenance (storm) BOF remind… Minturn, Dave B
- Re: [rddp] Storage Maintenance (storm) BOF remind… Felix Marti