[storm] iSCSI Consolidated Draft - Proposed Standard

<david.black@emc.com> Wed, 18 May 2011 17:23 UTC

Return-Path: <david.black@emc.com>
X-Original-To: storm@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: storm@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CB3F0E06C3 for <storm@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 18 May 2011 10:23:36 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -106.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 4N9pS3tJcmhc for <storm@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 18 May 2011 10:23:36 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mexforward.lss.emc.com (mexforward.lss.emc.com [128.222.32.20]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 34283E06B9 for <storm@ietf.org>; Wed, 18 May 2011 10:23:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from hop04-l1d11-si01.isus.emc.com (HOP04-L1D11-SI01.isus.emc.com [10.254.111.54]) by mexforward.lss.emc.com (Switch-3.4.3/Switch-3.4.3) with ESMTP id p4IHNXV2008466 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for <storm@ietf.org>; Wed, 18 May 2011 13:23:33 -0400
Received: from mailhub.lss.emc.com (mailhub.lss.emc.com [10.254.222.226]) by hop04-l1d11-si01.isus.emc.com (RSA Interceptor) for <storm@ietf.org>; Wed, 18 May 2011 13:23:28 -0400
Received: from mxhub18.corp.emc.com (mxhub18.corp.emc.com [10.254.93.47]) by mailhub.lss.emc.com (Switch-3.4.3/Switch-3.4.3) with ESMTP id p4IHNJcS029193 for <storm@ietf.org>; Wed, 18 May 2011 13:23:19 -0400
Received: from mx14a.corp.emc.com ([169.254.1.245]) by mxhub18.corp.emc.com ([10.254.93.47]) with mapi; Wed, 18 May 2011 13:23:18 -0400
From: <david.black@emc.com>
To: <storm@ietf.org>
Date: Wed, 18 May 2011 13:23:17 -0400
Thread-Topic: iSCSI Consolidated Draft - Proposed Standard
Thread-Index: AcwVgEcZa/4ASxrBTRWKUCiEO3IHDQ==
Message-ID: <7C4DFCE962635144B8FAE8CA11D0BF1E0588F42001@MX14A.corp.emc.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
acceptlanguage: en-US
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-EMM-MHVC: 1
Subject: [storm] iSCSI Consolidated Draft - Proposed Standard
X-BeenThere: storm@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Storage Maintenance WG <storm.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/storm>, <mailto:storm-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/storm>
List-Post: <mailto:storm@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:storm-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/storm>, <mailto:storm-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 18 May 2011 17:23:36 -0000

Having seen only one person express a desire to take the iSCSI consolidated
draft to Draft Standard RFC status, I believe the conclusion is to take the
current draft to Proposed Standard status.  It's always possible to do the
implementation survey work later to take it to Draft Standard RFC status.

Thanks,
--David
----------------------------------------------------
David L. Black, Distinguished Engineer
EMC Corporation, 176 South St., Hopkinton, MA  01748
+1 (508) 293-7953             FAX: +1 (508) 293-7786
david.black@emc.com        Mobile: +1 (978) 394-7754
----------------------------------------------------