Re: Publication has been requested for draft-ietf-nfsv4-rpcrdma-cm-pvt-data-04

Hi Magnus-

> On Nov 6, 2019, at 8:22 AM, Magnus Westerlund <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> On Tue, 2019-11-05 at 12:30 -0500, Chuck Lever wrote:
>> If the AD and the WG support the change, then the next revision of this
>> document will be internally changed to Proposed Standard, and I will
>> tag it as an update to RFC 8166.
>> 
>> NB: The draft submission window is closed until November 16.
> 
> If there is no WG disagreement the next few days, please go ahead and change. As
> AD I think it is appropriate to publish this as standards track, especially if
> it can be made clear that this optional extension is usable in at least one IETF
> protocol and potentially others. 
> 
> Regarding the draft submission lock down. Send me the updated document when you
> addressed all the issues and I will get it posted. This will be manually handled
> , but I see no reason for not getting the draft posted.

I can get the editorial changes done today, but submission will depend on
resolving the issue with that stale IBTA URL.

Because there is a registration wall, I expect that the IBTA will not be
willing to provide a permanent URL. Perhaps this reference could be changed
to a true bibliographic citation.

Thoughts, opinions, anyone?


> Cheers
> 
> Magnus
> 
>> 
>> 
>>> On Nov 5, 2019, at 12:22 PM, Tom Talpey <
>>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>> 
>>> TL;DR Proposed Standard is appropriate.
>>> 
>>> Longer version, I may be the guilty party here. When Chuck originally was
>>> exploring using private data to extend rpcrdmav1, I encouraged him to
>>> publish the format as a draft. By design, the private data is optional, for
>>> both the sender and the receiver. Its presence, and its recognition at the
>>> peer, drives the extended features.
>>> 
>>> At the time, the concern for standardization was whether it would be of
>>> interest to the WG, and/or to other implementations. Its adoption as a WG
>>> item settles that.
>>> 
>>> When published as Proposed Standard, the document should additionally be
>>> tagged as an optional extension to RFC8166.
>>> 
>>> From: nfsv4 <[email protected]> On Behalf Of spencer shepler
>>> Sent: Tuesday, November 5, 2019 10:40 AM
>>> To: Magnus Westerlund <[email protected]>
>>> Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]
>>> Subject: Re: [nfsv4] Publication has been requested for draft-ietf-nfsv4-
>>> rpcrdma-cm-pvt-data-04
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Magnus,
>>> 
>>> I did a quick update to the tool and went off the header of the I-D - it is
>>> marked as informational.
>>> 
>>> As you say, this should be on standards track.  So we have a quick tool
>>> update to do and when Chuck revs his document, he will just update.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On Tue, Nov 5, 2019 at 1:56 AM Magnus Westerlund <
>>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>> 
>>> Removing the IESG-Secretary and [email protected] address. 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On Mon, 2019-11-04 at 09:55 -0500, Chuck Lever wrote:
>>>> Hi Magnus-
>>>> 
>>>>> On Nov 4, 2019, at 9:53 AM, Magnus Westerlund <
>>>>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>> 
>>>>> The issue, is that the draft says Intended Status: Informational. The
>>>>> write-
>>>>> up
>>>>> says standard track (Proposed Standard). Based on the content I think
>>>>> the
>>>>> later
>>>>> is true.
>>>> 
>>>> We intentionally made this an Informational document.
>>> 
>>> Okay, that is not what the write-up said. Also, it does not read like an
>>> informational document. So, please provide me with the motivation why this
>>> should be published as an informational RFC. What I can see this is an
>>> extension
>>> to at least one IETF defined standards track document. I need to understand
>>> why
>>> the WG thinks it should be informational. 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Cheers
>>> 
>>> Magnus Westerlund 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> Networks, Ericsson Research
>>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> Ericsson AB                 | Phone  +46 10 7148287
>>> Torshamnsgatan 23           | Mobile +46 73 0949079
>>> SE-164 80 Stockholm, Sweden | mailto: [email protected]
>>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> 
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> nfsv4 mailing list
>>> [email protected]
>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nfsv4
>> 
>> --
>> Chuck Lever
>> 
>> 
>> 
> -- 
> Cheers
> 
> Magnus Westerlund 
> 
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> Networks, Ericsson Research
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> Ericsson AB                 | Phone  +46 10 7148287
> Torshamnsgatan 23           | Mobile +46 73 0949079
> SE-164 80 Stockholm, Sweden | mailto: [email protected]
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------

--
Chuck Lever



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