Re: [rddp] BOF proposal for San Francisco: updates to RDDP protocols
Black_David@emc.com Tue, 13 January 2009 00:05 UTC
Return-Path: <rddp-bounces@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: rddp-archive@optimus.ietf.org
Delivered-To: ietfarch-rddp-archive@core3.amsl.com
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 15F303A6836; Mon, 12 Jan 2009 16:05:14 -0800 (PST)
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 B7BE53A6836 for <rddp@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 12 Jan 2009 16:05:12 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.554
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.554 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.045, 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 ChXNmmxyOlzJ for <rddp@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 12 Jan 2009 16:05:11 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mexforward.lss.emc.com (mexforward.lss.emc.com [128.222.32.20]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 86BBA3A67DB for <rddp@ietf.org>; Mon, 12 Jan 2009 16:05:11 -0800 (PST)
Received: from hop04-l1d11-si02.isus.emc.com (HOP04-L1D11-SI02.isus.emc.com [10.254.111.55]) by mexforward.lss.emc.com (Switch-3.2.5/Switch-3.1.7) with ESMTP id n0D04tNc023672 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Mon, 12 Jan 2009 19:04:55 -0500 (EST)
From: Black_David@emc.com
Received: from mailhub.lss.emc.com (numailhub.lss.emc.com [10.254.144.15]) by hop04-l1d11-si02.isus.emc.com (Tablus Interceptor); Mon, 12 Jan 2009 19:04:42 -0500
Received: from corpussmtp3.corp.emc.com (corpussmtp3.corp.emc.com [10.254.64.53]) by mailhub.lss.emc.com (Switch-3.3.2mp/Switch-3.3.0) with ESMTP id n0D04bpt007149; Mon, 12 Jan 2009 19:04:41 -0500
Received: from CORPUSMX80A.corp.emc.com ([10.254.89.201]) by corpussmtp3.corp.emc.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Mon, 12 Jan 2009 19:04:40 -0500
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2009 19:04:40 -0500
Message-ID: <9FA859626025B64FBC2AF149D97C944A01074DD2@CORPUSMX80A.corp.emc.com>
In-Reply-To: <4911F71203A09E4D9981D27F9D8308580E460E98@orsmsx503.amr.corp.intel.com>
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
Thread-Topic: BOF proposal for San Francisco: updates to RDDP protocols
Thread-Index: Acl0Up8JAqxGSh3kTbKAmK1iZ6xUrgAAAgUgAC894AAAAKakQA==
References: <9FA859626025B64FBC2AF149D97C944A01074D92@CORPUSMX80A.corp.emc.com> <4911F71203A09E4D9981D27F9D8308580E460E98@orsmsx503.amr.corp.intel.com>
To: dave.b.minturn@intel.com, rddp@ietf.org
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 13 Jan 2009 00:04:40.0578 (UTC) FILETIME=[87D90E20:01C97512]
X-EMM-EM: Active
X-RSA-Inspected: yes
X-RSA-Classifications:
X-RSA-Action: allow
Subject: Re: [rddp] BOF proposal for San Francisco: updates to RDDP protocols
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/pipermail/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>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: rddp-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: rddp-bounces@ietf.org
Dave, No, I don't have a proposed day, but I'll note this conflict when I ask for the BOF to be scheduled. Thanks, --David > -----Original Message----- > From: Minturn, Dave B [mailto:dave.b.minturn@intel.com] > Sent: Monday, January 12, 2009 6:55 PM > To: Black, David; rddp@ietf.org > Subject: RE: BOF proposal for San Francisco: updates to RDDP protocols > > David, > > Do you have a proposed day for the BOF? I'm asking because > the OpenFabrics Alliance conference is running concurrently > on March 22->25 in Sonoma (~50 miles away). It would be > great if the BOF could be held on the latter part of the IETF > conference to accommodate the iWARP folks. > > Thx, > Dave Minturn > > -----Original Message----- > From: rddp-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:rddp-bounces@ietf.org] On > Behalf Of Black_David@emc.com > Sent: Sunday, January 11, 2009 5:13 PM > To: rddp@ietf.org > Subject: [rddp] BOF proposal for San Francisco: updates to > RDDP protocols > Importance: High > > FYI - the RDDP protocols are included in this BOF proposal, > although the only RDDP work item in my initial list is a > small update to MPA that's motivated by support for MPI > applications. > > Thanks, > --David > > -----Original Message----- > From: Black, David > Sent: Sunday, January 11, 2009 8:11 PM > To: ips@ietf.org > Cc: Black, David > Subject: BOF proposal for San Francisco: updates to iSCSI and > other IPS > protocols > Importance: High > > I'm about to propose a Birds of a Feather (BOF) session for IETF in > San Francisco to discuss forming a working group (tentative name: > STORM [STORage Maintenance] to update iSCSI and other IPS protocols. > The primary purpose of this work would be to reflect implementation > experience in the specifications - this is NOT intended to be a > means of working on version 2 or even version 1.1. > > The initial draft of the BOF proposal follows - by the time the BOF > is held (and hopefully well before, there will be a draft charter) - > the purpose of the BOF meeting will be to discuss the draft charter > and proposed plan of work in order to decide whether to ask that > a working group be formed. I wrote this text quickly, so all > suggestions for edits are welcome. > > A number of people have already expressed interest in the draft > work items listed below - in particular, Julian Satran, Kalman > Meth and Mallikarjun Chadalapaka have all indicated an intention > to work on the updated iSCSI specification. Additional work items > can be added - it would be useful for anyone suggesting a work item > to indicate their intended role/contribution for that work item > (e.g., draft author). For the implementation survey (basis for > possibly taking iSCSI to Draft Standard status), I'd be interested > in hearing from anyone who's interested *and* has worked on past > imp > > Thanks, > --David > ------------------------------------------------------------------ > > Proposed Transport Area (TSV) BOF: STORM (STORage Maintenance) > Proposed for IETF San Francisco (March 22-27, 2009) > > The IETF ips (IP Storage) and rddp (Remote Direct Data Placement) > working > groups have produced a number of protocols (e.g., iSCSI) that > have been > implemented and are being used (to varying degrees). The purpose of > this > BOF is to determine whether a working group should be formed for > protocol > maintenance and update based primarily on implementation experience. > This work is envisioned to encompass: > - Implementation-driven revisions and updates to existing protocols. > - Interoperability reports so that some of the resulting revised > protocols > can be taken to Draft Standard RFC status. > - Minor protocol changes or additions; this is anticipated to include > iSCSI features for SAM-4 compliance and an MPA startup change > needed to better support MPI applications. > The work will not include wholesale changes to the existing protocols; > this is not intended to be an opportunity to produce version 2 (or > even version 1.1) of any of the protocols. Backwards compatibility > with existing implementations will be required for all changes and > additions. > > Initial draft list of work items: > - iSCSI: Combine RFCs 3720 (iSCSI), 3980 (NAA names), 4850 (node > architecture > key) and 5048 (corrections/clarifications) into one document, > removing > features that are not implemented in practice (e.g., markers). > - iSCSI: Interoperability report on what has been implemented and is > known to > interoperate in support of taking iSCSI to Draft Standard RFC > status. > The decision about whether to target Draft Standard RFC status > would > be discussed in the BOF in San Francisco - this may entail > updates to > RFC 3722 [stringprep for iSCSI] and 3723 [security]. > - iSCSI: Add features to support SAM-4 (4th version of SCSI > architecture) > in a backwards-compatible fashion. iSCSI is currently based on > SAM-2. > - iFCP: The Address Translation mode of iFCP needs to be > retired (SHOULD > NOT > implement or use), as there are problems with it, and only the > Address > Transparent mode of iFCP is in use. A short draft should be > sufficient > to do this (i.e., a complete rewrite of RFC 4172 is not > anticipated). > - RDDP MPA: Good support for MPI applications requires a > small update to > the > startup functionality to allow either end of the connection to > initiate. > - iSER: Experience with InfiniBand implementations suggest a few minor > updates to reflect what has been done in practice. > > Additional work (e.g., updated/improved iSNS for iSCSI, MIB > changes) is > possible if there's interest. I believe I have private expressions of > interest or commitment to the items explicitly listed above. > > > _______________________________________________ > rddp mailing list > rddp@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rddp > > _______________________________________________ rddp mailing list rddp@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rddp
- [rddp] BOF proposal for San Francisco: updates to… Black_David
- Re: [rddp] BOF proposal for San Francisco: update… Minturn, Dave B
- Re: [rddp] BOF proposal for San Francisco: update… Black_David