Re: State of NFSv4 implementations ( who is active )

>The other use of this knowledge is if, big if, our documents move from
proposed standard, they will need
> implementation reports and this type of information will be helpful.

Given that Draft Standard has gone away, it is an enormous if.   Still,
that information has many interesting uses and it is good that we are
getting it.

On Mon, Oct 28, 2019 at 2:02 AM spencer shepler <[email protected]>
wrote:

>
> As a working group and care taker of the proposed standards within our
> purview, I think it would be fruitful to have a collectively working group
> view of what implementations are in-market and which are under support only
> and which are under active development.
>
> As we work through various bis work, we need to understand whom to have
> contact with within the broader community, who is represented directly
> within the working group and which implementations are not.
>
> The other use of this knowledge is if, big if, our documents move from
> proposed standard, they will need implementation reports and this type of
> information will be helpful.
>
> If individuals can self report here for those organizations (or
> individuals - Hi, Rick!) that are active, etc., that would be great.  If
> there are implementations not represented here based on alias membership,
> please ask for permission and then post those activities as well.
>
> Thanks,
> Spencer
>
> _______________________________________________
> nfsv4 mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nfsv4
>

_______________________________________________
nfsv4 mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nfsv4