From exim@www1.ietf.org Mon Nov 3 00:11:24 2003 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id AAA06968 for ; Mon, 3 Nov 2003 00:11:24 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AGWzX-0004RV-Vf for imss-archive@odin.ietf.org; Mon, 03 Nov 2003 00:11:06 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id hA35B3o1017071 for imss-archive@odin.ietf.org; Mon, 3 Nov 2003 00:11:03 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AGWzX-0004RG-OZ for imss-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Mon, 03 Nov 2003 00:11:03 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id AAA06959 for ; Mon, 3 Nov 2003 00:10:51 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AGWzV-0007jr-00 for imss-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 03 Nov 2003 00:11:01 -0500 Received: from ietf.org ([132.151.1.19] helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AGWzV-0007jn-00 for imss-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 03 Nov 2003 00:11:01 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AGWzW-0004QF-Of; Mon, 03 Nov 2003 00:11:02 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AGWzP-0004PX-BO for imss@optimus.ietf.org; Mon, 03 Nov 2003 00:10:55 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id AAA06954; Mon, 3 Nov 2003 00:10:40 -0500 (EST) From: elizabeth.rodriguez@dothill.com Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AGWzK-0007jk-00; Mon, 03 Nov 2003 00:10:50 -0500 Received: from mail.dothill.com ([155.254.128.7] helo=dothill.com) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AGWzJ-0007jg-00; Mon, 03 Nov 2003 00:10:49 -0500 Received: from exchange.artecon.com (exchange [206.6.182.75]) by dothill.com (8.12.9+Sun/8.12.5) with ESMTP id hA358qrT003840; Sun, 2 Nov 2003 21:08:54 -0800 (PST) Received: by exchange.artecon.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id <42RVMVX4>; Sun, 2 Nov 2003 20:58:52 -0800 Message-ID: <6E76A781C4D7D511A0C000105A209B59048494DD@exchange.artecon.com> To: imss@ietf.org Cc: ipv6@ietf.org, t11_3@t11.org, cds@andiamo.com, black_david@emc.com, Margaret.Wasserman@nokia.com, bwijnen@lucent.com Date: Sun, 2 Nov 2003 20:58:51 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) Content-Type: text/plain Subject: [imss] IMSS: Working Group last call on IPv6 over Fibre Channel Draft Sender: imss-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: imss-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: imss@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Internet and Management Support for Storage Working Group List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Hello, I would like to announce the IETF IMSS Working Group last call on the IPv6 over Fibre Channel draft. The draft may be found at http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-imss-ipv6-over-fibre-channel- 00.txt The last call period will end at 9pm EST on Monday, November 24, 2003. Please address any technical comments to the IMSS mailing list at imss@ietf.org. Editorial comments may be made directly to the draft author, Claudio DeSanti, at cds@andiamo.com. Please copy me at elizabeth.rodriguez@dothill.com and our technical coordinators for this draft, David Black (black_david@emc.com) and Margaret Wasserman (margaret.wasserman@nokia.com). Summary: Draft: IPv6 over Fibre Channel Draft URL: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-imss-ipv6-over-fibre-channel- 00.txt WGLC ends: Monday, November 24, 2003 at 9pm EST Technical comments to: imss@ietf.org Editorial comments to: Claudio DeSanti (cds@andiamo.org), David Black (black_david@emc.com), Margaret Wasserman (margaret.wasserman@nokia.com) and Elizabeth Rodriguez (elizabeth.rodriguez@dothill.com) Thank you, Elizabeth Rodriguez IMSS Chair IMSS Charter: http://www.ietf.org/html.charters/imss-charter.html To subscribe to the IMSS mailing list, see https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/imss _______________________________________________ imss mailing list imss@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/imss From exim@www1.ietf.org Thu Nov 20 13:28:21 2003 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA17433 for ; Thu, 20 Nov 2003 13:28:20 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AMtX9-0007ae-7R for imss-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 20 Nov 2003 13:28:03 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id hAKIS3Fg029176 for imss-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 20 Nov 2003 13:28:03 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AMtX9-0007aV-3y for imss-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Thu, 20 Nov 2003 13:28:03 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA17394 for ; Thu, 20 Nov 2003 13:27:50 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AMtX6-0007lP-00 for imss-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 20 Nov 2003 13:28:00 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AMtX6-0007lE-00 for imss-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 20 Nov 2003 13:28:00 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AMtX7-0007aQ-Bd; Thu, 20 Nov 2003 13:28:01 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AMtWc-0007Zi-TH for imss@optimus.ietf.org; Thu, 20 Nov 2003 13:27:30 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA17323 for ; Thu, 20 Nov 2003 13:27:18 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AMtWa-0007je-00 for imss@ietf.org; Thu, 20 Nov 2003 13:27:28 -0500 Received: from firecrest.mail.pas.earthlink.net ([207.217.121.247]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AMtWa-0007iD-00 for imss@ietf.org; Thu, 20 Nov 2003 13:27:28 -0500 Received: from 235.130.dothill.com ([155.254.130.235] helo=EGRodriguez) by firecrest.mail.pas.earthlink.net with asmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 1AMtVz-0002gI-00; Thu, 20 Nov 2003 10:26:53 -0800 From: "Elizabeth Rodriguez" To: Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2003 10:26:28 -0800 Message-ID: <000001c3af93$d3623d70$6d01a8c0@EGRodriguez> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.4510 Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165 X-ELNK-Trace: 298a5331f71a6b7b79fa035ab2d882059ef193a6bfc3dd48b753f2c9bf31778d153139ccfa3396973553614b9f64653b350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: [imss] Draft minutes of IMSS WG Meeting Sender: imss-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: imss-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: imss@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Internet and Management Support for Storage Working Group List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi all, Following is the draft minutes for IMSS WG. Please respond with any comments, corrections, omissions, etc by Nov = 26th. Thanks, Elizabeth Rodriguez IMSS chair ---- IETF-58 IMSS WG Draft Minutes Met on November 11, 2003 at 3:45 pm in Minneapolis, MN=20 This was the initial meeting of the IMSS working group. =20 The agenda for the meeting was: =20 Agenda and Agenda Bashing (Elizabeth Rodriguez) IMSS Working Group Introduction (Elizabeth Rodriguez) Relationship with T11.5 (Roger Cummings)=20 IPv6 over Fibre Channel (Claudio DeSanti)=20 Open Mike =20 Elizabeth Rodriguez, IMSS WG chair, presented an introduction to the = IMSS Working Group, which can be found at:=20 =20 http://home.earthlink.net/~imsswg/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderfiles/IMS= SOv erview.pps This presentation included: 1) List of WG Chair, Area Director and Technical Advisors 2) Rational for the formation of the working group 3) Parts of the charter 4) WG Milestones 5) Intro to Roger Cummings presentation on INCITS and IMSS/T11.5 relationship 6) Background on the IMSS Working group draft in last call:=20 IPv6 over Fibre Channel, for which Claudio DeSanti presented=20 more information =20 Roger Cummings presented an introduction to INCITS and the relationship between the IMSS working group and T11.5. That presentation may be = found at:=20 ftp://ftp.t11.org/t11/docs/03-755v0.pdf=09 One of the principles of the relationship between IMSS and T11.5 is that IMSS will not standardize management of Fibre Channel features ahead of their incorporation into appropriate T11 Fibre Channel standards. T11.5 will begin work on the following MIBs in the near future: Fibre Channel Domain Manager MIB Fibre Channel Name Server MIB Extensions for Fibre Channel Interfaces MIB Keith McCloghrie (IMSS Technical Advisor) indicated that this may pose a problem with some of the proposed MIBs in that some features that should = be addressed in the MIBs are still quite volatile in T11.5. Roger = Cummings, T11.5 Chair indicated that a decision would need to be made some time = next year to determine how to address -- have things stabilized in T11, = should the items be removed from the MIB, or the MIB be delayed. This issue = must be addressed prior to T11.5 officially handing off the MIB to the IMSS working group. =20 Claudio DeSanti presented some history of the IPv6 over Fibre Channel = and some of the goals of this draft, which is currently in IMSS working = group last call. Claudio's presentation may be found at:=20 =20 http://home.earthlink.net/~imsswg/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderfiles/ipv= 6_o ver_fc_58-ietf.pps There were no questions, so the meeting concluded with Elizabeth = Rodriguez requesting that participants review the IPv6 over Fibre Channel draft = and submit technical comments to the IMSS mailing list and editorial = comments either to the IMSS mailing list or directly to the author with copy to = the technical advisors.=20 =20 Charter:=20 http://www.ietf.org/html.charters/imss-charter.html=20 =20 Subscribe to Mailing List: http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/imss =20 IPv6 over Fibre Channel draft in WG Last Call=20 http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-imss-ipv6-over-fibre-chann= el- 00.txt=20 Please note: The URLs above have been validated. Some of the URLs = listed above are long, and may span more than one line. In such instances, = please copy and paste the entire URL into your browser. =09 _______________________________________________ imss mailing list imss@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/imss From exim@www1.ietf.org Thu Nov 20 13:46:26 2003 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA18037 for ; Thu, 20 Nov 2003 13:46:26 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AMtoc-0000Jb-Gu for imss-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 20 Nov 2003 13:46:09 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id hAKIk6FV001202 for imss-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 20 Nov 2003 13:46:06 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AMtob-0000JF-WA for imss-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Thu, 20 Nov 2003 13:46:06 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA18017 for ; Thu, 20 Nov 2003 13:45:52 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AMtoZ-0000DT-00 for imss-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 20 Nov 2003 13:46:03 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AMtoZ-0000DQ-00 for imss-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 20 Nov 2003 13:46:03 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AMtoa-0000J1-TV; Thu, 20 Nov 2003 13:46:04 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AMtoB-0000E7-A2 for imss@optimus.ietf.org; Thu, 20 Nov 2003 13:45:42 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA17975; Thu, 20 Nov 2003 13:45:26 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AMto9-0000Ca-00; Thu, 20 Nov 2003 13:45:37 -0500 Received: from firecrest.mail.pas.earthlink.net ([207.217.121.247]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AMto8-0000CX-00; Thu, 20 Nov 2003 13:45:36 -0500 Received: from 235.130.dothill.com ([155.254.130.235] helo=EGRodriguez) by firecrest.mail.pas.earthlink.net with asmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 1AMto7-0007ky-00; Thu, 20 Nov 2003 10:45:35 -0800 From: "Elizabeth Rodriguez" To: Cc: , Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2003 10:44:47 -0800 Message-ID: <000901c3af96$6e4e3440$6d01a8c0@EGRodriguez> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.4510 Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165 X-ELNK-Trace: 298a5331f71a6b7b79fa035ab2d882059ef193a6bfc3dd48b753f2c9bf31778dbac1300a30a7e950350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: [imss] Reminder: IMSS Working Group last call on IPv6 over Fibre Channel Draft Ends Monday Nov 24 Sender: imss-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: imss-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: imss@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Internet and Management Support for Storage Working Group List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable This is a reminder that the FC over IPv6 draft is currently in IMSS = working group last call. The last call period ends on November 24 at 9pm EST. The draft may be found at=20 www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-imss-ipv6-over-fibre-channel-00.t= xt A link to the draft may also be found at the bottom of the IMSS WG home = page at www.ietf.org/html.charters/imss-charter.html. This page also = includes instructions on subscribing to the mailing list. If anyone has comments against this draft, please post them to the IMSS mailing list. If the comments are only editorial in nature, they may be posted to the mailing list or send directly to the author with copies to = the chair and technical advisors as indicated below. The original WG Last Call announcement follows. Thanks, Elizabeth Rodriguez IMSS Chair Note: The URLs above have been verified. If the URLs above do not work = for you, make sure your mailer has not split the URL over two lines. =20 -----Original Message----- From: imss-admin@ietf.org [mailto:imss-admin@ietf.org] On Behalf Of elizabeth.rodriguez@dothill.com Sent: Sunday, November 02, 2003 8:59 PM To: imss@ietf.org Cc: ipv6@ietf.org; t11_3@t11.org; cds@andiamo.com; black_david@emc.com; Margaret.Wasserman@nokia.com; bwijnen@lucent.com Subject: [imss] IMSS: Working Group last call on IPv6 over Fibre Channel Draft Hello, I would like to announce the IETF IMSS Working Group last call on the = IPv6 over Fibre Channel draft. The draft may be found at http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-imss-ipv6-over-fibre-chann= el- 00.txt The last call period will end at 9pm EST on Monday, November 24, 2003. =20 Please address any technical comments to the IMSS mailing list at imss@ietf.org.=20 Editorial comments may be made directly to the draft author, Claudio DeSanti, at cds@andiamo.com. Please copy me at elizabeth.rodriguez@dothill.com and our technical coordinators for this draft, David Black (black_david@emc.com) and = Margaret Wasserman (margaret.wasserman@nokia.com). Summary: Draft: IPv6 over Fibre Channel Draft URL: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-imss-ipv6-over-fibre-chann= el- 00.txt WGLC ends: Monday, November 24, 2003 at 9pm EST Technical comments to: imss@ietf.org Editorial comments to: Claudio DeSanti (cds@andiamo.org), David Black (black_david@emc.com), Margaret Wasserman (margaret.wasserman@nokia.com) = and Elizabeth Rodriguez (elizabeth.rodriguez@dothill.com) Thank you, Elizabeth Rodriguez IMSS Chair IMSS Charter: http://www.ietf.org/html.charters/imss-charter.html To subscribe to the IMSS mailing list, see https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/imss _______________________________________________ imss mailing list imss@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/imss _______________________________________________ imss mailing list imss@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/imss From exim@www1.ietf.org Thu Nov 20 15:39:20 2003 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id PAA24721 for ; Thu, 20 Nov 2003 15:39:20 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AMvZu-000154-C9 for imss-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 20 Nov 2003 15:39:02 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id hAKKd21q004150 for imss-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 20 Nov 2003 15:39:02 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AMvZu-00014N-6d for imss-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Thu, 20 Nov 2003 15:39:02 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id PAA24699 for ; Thu, 20 Nov 2003 15:38:49 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AMvZs-00022O-00 for imss-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 20 Nov 2003 15:39:00 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AMvZs-00022L-00 for imss-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 20 Nov 2003 15:39:00 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AMvZt-00013X-AT; Thu, 20 Nov 2003 15:39:01 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AMvW9-0000fc-39 for imss@optimus.ietf.org; Thu, 20 Nov 2003 15:35:09 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id PAA24569 for ; Thu, 20 Nov 2003 15:34:56 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AMvW7-0001y5-00 for imss@ietf.org; Thu, 20 Nov 2003 15:35:07 -0500 Received: from netcore.fi ([193.94.160.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AMvW6-0001x3-00 for imss@ietf.org; Thu, 20 Nov 2003 15:35:06 -0500 Received: from localhost (pekkas@localhost) by netcore.fi (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id hAKKYOi13444; Thu, 20 Nov 2003 22:34:24 +0200 Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2003 22:34:24 +0200 (EET) From: Pekka Savola To: Elizabeth Rodriguez cc: imss@ietf.org In-Reply-To: <000901c3af96$6e4e3440$6d01a8c0@EGRodriguez> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Subject: [imss] IPv6 over FC comments [Re: Reminder: IMSS Working Group last call on IPv6 over Fibre Channel Draft Ends Monday Nov 24] Sender: imss-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: imss-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: imss@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Internet and Management Support for Storage Working Group List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Thu, 20 Nov 2003, Elizabeth Rodriguez wrote: > This is a reminder that the FC over IPv6 draft is currently in IMSS working > group last call. The last call period ends on November 24 at 9pm EST. > > The draft may be found at > www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-imss-ipv6-over-fibre-channel-00.txt [...] Thanks for the reminder. I figured I should contribute with a review. Note: I know nothing about Fibre Channel. In general, I think the document is very good quality. Thanks for writing it. It's even vaguely comprehensible to non-FC folks, even though terminology quickly introduced in section 2 took quite a while to handle. I think the issues should be easily fixable. I've split the comments to a couple rough categories, categories sorted in the decreasing priority, the contents within the catories in the same order as the text. the biggest issue ----------------- 5. Maximum Transfer Unit The default MTU size for IPv6 [IPv6] packets over Fibre Channel is 65280 octets. This size may be reduced by a Router Advertisement [DISC] containing an MTU option that specifies a smaller MTU, or by manual configuration of each Nx_Port. However, as required by [IPv6], the MTU MUST NOT be lower than 1280 octets. If a Router Advertisement received on an Nx_Port has an MTU option specifying an MTU larger than 65280, or larger than a manually configured value, that MTU option MAY be logged to system management but MUST be otherwise ignored. ==> has this been discussed? As long as you use FC e.g. between storage devices, this is fine, but if you'd use it to access Internet, this default MTU could be a real pain, because 1500 MTU is de-facto standard out there in the big I. I'd suggest adding non-normative discussion text that clarifies whichever position you want to make (e.g., describe when you really, really should to use the MTU option if you stick with the default.) a bit more substantial ---------------------- 1. Introduction ==> Introduction is pretty much identical to the abstract. This is typically considered a bad idea, and shows that either Abstract or Introduction has not been fully utilized and properly written. - The format of its N_Port_Name MUST be one of 0x1, 0x2, 0x5, 0xC, 0xD, 0xE, 0xF. Other Name_Identifier formats are not acceptable to support IPv6; reword to: - The format of its N_Port_Name MUST be one of 0x1, 0x2, 0x5, 0xC, 0xD, 0xE, 0xF. IPv6 support for other Name_Identifier formats is outside the scope of this specification. (similar in section 4.4) ... - It MUST be able to transmit and receive an FC-4 Information Unit at least 1304 octets long; [not just issue in this sentence, but triggered by it because I started looking where the 1280+24 comes from..] ==> the doc is not clear (at least to someone not well versed with FC :-) what Information Unit refers to; is it "Data field" or "Frame payload" in figure 1? There seems to be some confusing text because fig 2 shows also the Optional Header but other text discusses this as if this was different? (maybe a terminology section could be considered, but I'm not sure if that'd actually help that much..) +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Type | Length = 2 | Reserved | +---------------+---------------+---------------+---------------+ | | +- N_Port_Name -+ | | +---------------+---------------+---------------+---------------+ | N_Port_ID | Reserved | +---------------+---------------+---------------+---------------+ ==> should maybe specify that Reserved fields MUST be zero when transmitting, and MUST be ignored when receiving (the typical MBZ rule) ? Receiving an FC Sequence carrying an IPv6 multicast packet MAY trigger some additional processing by the Nx_Port if that IPv6 packet requires a reply. In this case, if a valid Port Login to the Nx_Port that sent the IPv6 multicast packet does not exist, the Nx_Port MUST perform such a Port Login, and then use it for the unicast IPv6 reply. In the case of Neighbor Discovery messages [DISC], the N_Port_ID to which the Port Login is directed is taken from the N_Port_ID field of the Source/Target Link-layer Address option. ==> is it needed to specify "unicast" here? Isn't it at least theoretically possible that you'd receive a multicast packet, and want to reply with a multicast packet of your own? (similar later in the spec) mostly editorial issues ----------------------- ==> ID-nits: no references in the abstract, please. IPv6 over Fibre Channel ==> maybe reword this to: "Transmission of IPv6 Packets over Fibre Channel" (more similar to other IPv6-over-FOO document names) ? The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in [KEYWORDS]. ==> I'd put that at the end of the Introduction section; that's where it normally resides. Warning to readers familiar with Fibre Channel: both Fibre Channel and IETF standards use the same byte transmission order. However, the bit numbering is different. See Appendix C for guidance. ==> I'd rather place this in the Introduction. - F_CTL, SEQ_ID, SEQ_CNT, OX_ID, RX_ID: see section 10, section 11, and [FC-FS] for additional requirements. ==> D_ID, S_ID, and Parameter were not described here. typos or very minor nits ------------------------ IMSS Working Group Claudio DeSanti ==> s/Claudio/C./ (that's just a convention, the same at the bottom of each page :-) transmission words that act as frame delimiters. The CRC is 4-octets ==> s/4-/4 / The FC Header is 24-octets long and contains several fields ==> s/24-/24 / ordering, that corresponds to the standard network byte order or ==> s/,// (or use "which", typically don't use comma before "that") 6. Stateless Autoconfiguration ==> s/Auto/Address Auto/ (similar elsewhere; the formal name is "stateless address autoconfiguration") 6.5 Generating an Interface ID from a EUI-64 mapped N_Port_Name ==> s/a EUI-64/an EUI-64/ (similar elsewhere) An Exchange Responder is not required to assign RX_IDs. If a RX_ID of ==> s/a RX_ID/an RX_ID/ (similar elsewhere?) The Exchange Originator MAY terminate Exchanges by setting the F_CTL LS bit [FC-FS]. Exchanges MAY be torn down by the Exchange Originator or Exchange Responder by using the ABTS protocol. IPv6 Exchanges ==> spell out ABTS, maybe refer to it (the only time the term is used in this document) -- Pekka Savola "You each name yourselves king, yet the Netcore Oy kingdom bleeds." Systems. Networks. Security. -- George R.R. Martin: A Clash of Kings _______________________________________________ imss mailing list imss@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/imss From exim@www1.ietf.org Thu Nov 20 16:09:18 2003 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA26631 for ; Thu, 20 Nov 2003 16:09:18 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AMw2u-0003A2-SL for imss-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 20 Nov 2003 16:09:00 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id hAKL90f5012144 for imss-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 20 Nov 2003 16:09:00 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AMw2u-00039n-O7 for imss-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Thu, 20 Nov 2003 16:09:00 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA26560 for ; Thu, 20 Nov 2003 16:08:47 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AMw2t-0002n0-00 for imss-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 20 Nov 2003 16:08:59 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AMw2s-0002mx-00 for imss-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 20 Nov 2003 16:08:58 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AMw2t-00039e-RD; Thu, 20 Nov 2003 16:08:59 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AMvyv-0002Vk-3l for imss@optimus.ietf.org; Thu, 20 Nov 2003 16:04:53 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA26398; Thu, 20 Nov 2003 16:04:39 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AMvyt-0002hu-00; Thu, 20 Nov 2003 16:04:51 -0500 Received: from darkstar.iprg.nokia.com ([205.226.5.69]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AMvys-0002gi-00; Thu, 20 Nov 2003 16:04:50 -0500 Received: (from root@localhost) by darkstar.iprg.nokia.com (8.11.0/8.11.0-DARKSTAR) id hAKL45v24940; Thu, 20 Nov 2003 13:04:05 -0800 X-mProtect: <200311202104> Nokia Silicon Valley Messaging Protection Received: from ftemplin.iprg.nokia.com (205.226.2.67, claiming to be "iprg.nokia.com") by darkstar.iprg.nokia.com smtpdJAIO1Z; Thu, 20 Nov 2003 13:04:03 PST Message-ID: <3FBD2E06.4060208@iprg.nokia.com> Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2003 13:11:34 -0800 From: Fred Templin User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.0.2) Gecko/20021120 Netscape/7.01 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Elizabeth Rodriguez CC: imss@ietf.org, t11_3@t11.org, ipv6@ietf.org References: <000901c3af96$6e4e3440$6d01a8c0@EGRodriguez> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [imss] Re: Reminder: IMSS Working Group last call on IPv6 over Fibre Channel Draft Ends Monday Nov 24 Sender: imss-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: imss-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: imss@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Internet and Management Support for Storage Working Group List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit ~64KB MTU L2 media, huh? Sounds interesting. Has there been any consideration given to L2 bridging between FiberChannel and other media such as Gbps and 10/100 Ethernet, or are you expecting everything between dissimilar media to go through a router? Thanks - Fred ftemplin@iprg.nokia.com Elizabeth Rodriguez wrote: >This is a reminder that the FC over IPv6 draft is currently in IMSS working >group last call. The last call period ends on November 24 at 9pm EST. > >The draft may be found at >www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-imss-ipv6-over-fibre-channel-00.txt > >A link to the draft may also be found at the bottom of the IMSS WG home page >at www.ietf.org/html.charters/imss-charter.html. This page also includes >instructions on subscribing to the mailing list. > >If anyone has comments against this draft, please post them to the IMSS >mailing list. If the comments are only editorial in nature, they may be >posted to the mailing list or send directly to the author with copies to the >chair and technical advisors as indicated below. > >The original WG Last Call announcement follows. > >Thanks, >Elizabeth Rodriguez >IMSS Chair > >Note: The URLs above have been verified. If the URLs above do not work for >you, make sure your mailer has not split the URL over two lines. > >-----Original Message----- >From: imss-admin@ietf.org [mailto:imss-admin@ietf.org] On Behalf Of >elizabeth.rodriguez@dothill.com >Sent: Sunday, November 02, 2003 8:59 PM >To: imss@ietf.org >Cc: ipv6@ietf.org; t11_3@t11.org; cds@andiamo.com; black_david@emc.com; >Margaret.Wasserman@nokia.com; bwijnen@lucent.com >Subject: [imss] IMSS: Working Group last call on IPv6 over Fibre Channel >Draft > >Hello, > >I would like to announce the IETF IMSS Working Group last call on the IPv6 >over Fibre Channel draft. >The draft may be found at >http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-imss-ipv6-over-fibre-channel- >00.txt >The last call period will end at 9pm EST on Monday, November 24, 2003. > >Please address any technical comments to the IMSS mailing list at >imss@ietf.org. >Editorial comments may be made directly to the draft author, Claudio >DeSanti, at cds@andiamo.com. >Please copy me at elizabeth.rodriguez@dothill.com and our technical >coordinators for this draft, David Black (black_david@emc.com) and Margaret >Wasserman (margaret.wasserman@nokia.com). > >Summary: > >Draft: IPv6 over Fibre Channel >Draft URL: >http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-imss-ipv6-over-fibre-channel- >00.txt >WGLC ends: Monday, November 24, 2003 at 9pm EST >Technical comments to: imss@ietf.org >Editorial comments to: Claudio DeSanti (cds@andiamo.org), David Black >(black_david@emc.com), Margaret Wasserman (margaret.wasserman@nokia.com) and >Elizabeth Rodriguez (elizabeth.rodriguez@dothill.com) > >Thank you, > >Elizabeth Rodriguez >IMSS Chair > >IMSS Charter: http://www.ietf.org/html.charters/imss-charter.html >To subscribe to the IMSS mailing list, see >https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/imss > >_______________________________________________ >imss mailing list >imss@ietf.org >https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/imss > > > >-------------------------------------------------------------------- >IETF IPv6 working group mailing list >ipv6@ietf.org >Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 >-------------------------------------------------------------------- > > _______________________________________________ imss mailing list imss@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/imss From exim@www1.ietf.org Thu Nov 20 18:12:18 2003 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id SAA06418 for ; Thu, 20 Nov 2003 18:12:18 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AMxxy-0004az-Rp for imss-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 20 Nov 2003 18:12:03 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id hAKNC2fY017661 for imss-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 20 Nov 2003 18:12:02 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AMxxy-0004am-M7 for imss-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Thu, 20 Nov 2003 18:12:02 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id SAA06368 for ; Thu, 20 Nov 2003 18:11:47 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AMxxv-0006KV-00 for imss-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 20 Nov 2003 18:11:59 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AMxxv-0006KS-00 for imss-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 20 Nov 2003 18:11:59 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AMxxx-0004ag-Mh; Thu, 20 Nov 2003 18:12:01 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AMxxu-0004XO-H3 for imss@optimus.ietf.org; Thu, 20 Nov 2003 18:11:58 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id SAA06351 for ; Thu, 20 Nov 2003 18:11:43 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AMxxr-0006KB-00 for imss@ietf.org; Thu, 20 Nov 2003 18:11:55 -0500 Received: from sj-iport-3-in.cisco.com ([171.71.176.72] helo=sj-iport-3.cisco.com) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AMxxq-0006K2-00 for imss@ietf.org; Thu, 20 Nov 2003 18:11:54 -0500 Received: from sj-core-5.cisco.com (171.71.177.238) by sj-iport-3.cisco.com with ESMTP; 20 Nov 2003 15:12:02 +0000 Received: from mira-sjc5-f.cisco.com (IDENT:mirapoint@mira-sjc5-f.cisco.com [171.71.163.13]) by sj-core-5.cisco.com (8.12.9/8.12.6) with ESMTP id hAKNBNjq026458; Thu, 20 Nov 2003 15:11:23 -0800 (PST) Received: from cds-w2k02.andiamo.com (dhcp-171-71-49-41.cisco.com [171.71.49.41]) by mira-sjc5-f.cisco.com (Mirapoint Messaging Server MOS 3.3.6-GR) with ESMTP id AMT21952; Thu, 20 Nov 2003 15:11:21 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <4.3.2.7.2.20031120131705.038a3d90@mira-sjcd-1.cisco.com> X-Sender: cds@andiamo.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.2 Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2003 15:11:21 -0800 To: Pekka Savola From: Claudio DeSanti Subject: Re: [imss] IPv6 over FC comments [Re: Reminder: IMSS Working Group last call on IPv6 over Fibre Channel Draft Ends Monday Nov 24] Cc: Elizabeth Rodriguez , imss@ietf.org In-Reply-To: References: <000901c3af96$6e4e3440$6d01a8c0@EGRodriguez> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: imss-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: imss-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: imss@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Internet and Management Support for Storage Working Group List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Hi Pekka, thanks a lot for your comments. See in-line for my replies. Claudio. At 10:34 PM 11/20/2003 +0200, Pekka Savola wrote: >On Thu, 20 Nov 2003, Elizabeth Rodriguez wrote: > > This is a reminder that the FC over IPv6 draft is currently in IMSS working > > group last call. The last call period ends on November 24 at 9pm EST. > > > > The draft may be found at > > www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-imss-ipv6-over-fibre-channel-00.txt >[...] > >Thanks for the reminder. I figured I should contribute with a review. >Note: I know nothing about Fibre Channel. > >In general, I think the document is very good quality. Thanks for >writing it. It's even vaguely comprehensible to non-FC folks, even >though terminology quickly introduced in section 2 took quite a while >to handle. I think the issues should be easily fixable. > >I've split the comments to a couple rough categories, categories >sorted in the decreasing priority, the contents within the catories in >the same order as the text. > >the biggest issue >----------------- > >5. Maximum Transfer Unit > > The default MTU size for IPv6 [IPv6] packets over Fibre Channel is > 65280 octets. This size may be reduced by a Router Advertisement > [DISC] containing an MTU option that specifies a smaller MTU, or by > manual configuration of each Nx_Port. However, as required by [IPv6], > the MTU MUST NOT be lower than 1280 octets. If a Router Advertisement > received on an Nx_Port has an MTU option specifying an MTU larger > than 65280, or larger than a manually configured value, that MTU > option MAY be logged to system management but MUST be otherwise > ignored. > >==> has this been discussed? As long as you use FC e.g. between >storage devices, this is fine, but if you'd use it to access Internet, >this default MTU could be a real pain, because 1500 MTU is de-facto >standard out there in the big I. The 65280 octects MTU size comes from the IPv4 over Fibre Channel specification, RFC 2625, and one of the goal of the IPv6 over FC spec is to reuse the encapsulation defined for IPv4. It is clearly different than the ethernet MTU, but I do not see any particular issue with this number, considering that both Path MTU discovery and the MTU option in router advertisements may take care of it. In particular, I would assume that an IPv6 router connecting a Fibre Channel fabric with networks of different technologies would announce an appropriate MTU on the FC side. >I'd suggest adding non-normative discussion text that clarifies >whichever position you want to make (e.g., describe when you really, >really should to use the MTU option if you stick with the default.) > > >a bit more substantial >---------------------- > >1. Introduction > >==> Introduction is pretty much identical to the abstract. This is >typically considered >a bad idea, and shows that either Abstract or Introduction has not been >fully utilized >and properly written. I'll use your additional suggestions to differentiate the introduction section from the abstract section. Moreover, I could change the title "Introduction to Fibre Channel" to "Fibre Channel in a nutshell" (or something similar) to avoid two "Introduction" in a row. > - The format of its N_Port_Name MUST be one of 0x1, 0x2, 0x5, 0xC, > 0xD, 0xE, 0xF. Other Name_Identifier formats are not acceptable to > support IPv6; > >reword to: > > - The format of its N_Port_Name MUST be one of 0x1, 0x2, 0x5, 0xC, > 0xD, 0xE, 0xF. IPv6 support for other Name_Identifier formats is > outside the scope of this specification. > >(similar in section 4.4) Ok. >... > > - It MUST be able to transmit and receive an FC-4 Information Unit > at least 1304 octets long; > >[not just issue in this sentence, but triggered by it because I >started looking where the 1280+24 comes from..] > >==> the doc is not clear (at least to someone not well versed with FC >:-) what Information Unit refers to; is it "Data field" or "Frame >payload" in figure 1? There seems to be some confusing text because >fig 2 shows also the Optional Header but other text discusses this as >if this was different? > >(maybe a terminology section could be considered, but I'm not sure if >that'd actually help that much..) This requirement translates in Fibre Channel terms the IPv6 requirement that each link must have an MTU equal or greater to 1280 octects. The number 1304 comes from Figure 2. The Information Unit term is introduced in section 2.4, and used in section 4.1 to explain the IPv6 - FC mapping. I recognize that sometimes I used the term "Information Unit" and sometimes the term "Sequence payload". Altough a Fibre Channel person is able to contextualize both terms, a more consistent terminology may be appropriate here. > +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ > | Type | Length = 2 | Reserved | > +---------------+---------------+---------------+---------------+ > | | > +- N_Port_Name -+ > | | > +---------------+---------------+---------------+---------------+ > | N_Port_ID | Reserved | > +---------------+---------------+---------------+---------------+ > >==> should maybe specify that Reserved fields MUST be zero when >transmitting, and MUST be ignored when receiving (the typical MBZ >rule) ? Ok. Additionally, I recently noticed that swapping the last reserved field with the N_Port_ID field could slightly facilitate the processing in 32 bit processors, because the N_Port_ID field would be in the "right" place to directly load the word in a register. The option would be as follows: +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Type | Length = 2 | Reserved | +---------------+---------------+---------------+---------------+ | | +- N_Port_Name -+ | | +---------------+---------------+---------------+---------------+ | Reserved | N_Port_ID | +---------------+---------------+---------------+---------------+ Any comment on this idea? > Receiving an FC Sequence carrying an IPv6 multicast packet MAY > trigger some additional processing by the Nx_Port if that IPv6 packet > requires a reply. In this case, if a valid Port Login to the Nx_Port > that sent the IPv6 multicast packet does not exist, the Nx_Port MUST > perform such a Port Login, and then use it for the unicast IPv6 > reply. In the case of Neighbor Discovery messages [DISC], the > N_Port_ID to which the Port Login is directed is taken from the > N_Port_ID field of the Source/Target Link-layer Address option. > >==> is it needed to specify "unicast" here? Isn't it at least >theoretically possible that you'd receive a multicast packet, and want >to reply with a multicast packet of your own? (similar later in the >spec) I believe we need the unicast word. The case in which you want to reply with a multicast packet will be handled by the default broadcast login, and does not require a specific port login to be performed. >mostly editorial issues >----------------------- > >==> ID-nits: no references in the abstract, please. > > IPv6 over Fibre Channel > >==> maybe reword this to: "Transmission of IPv6 Packets over Fibre >Channel" (more similar to other IPv6-over-FOO document names) ? I may do that. The current title comes from RFC 2625: "IP and ARP over Fibre Channel" > The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", > "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this > document are to be interpreted as described in [KEYWORDS]. > >==> I'd put that at the end of the Introduction section; that's where >it normally resides. > > Warning to readers familiar with Fibre Channel: both Fibre Channel > and IETF standards use the same byte transmission order. However, the > bit numbering is different. See Appendix C for guidance. > >==> I'd rather place this in the Introduction. Ok for both suggestions. > - F_CTL, SEQ_ID, SEQ_CNT, OX_ID, RX_ID: see section 10, section 11, > and [FC-FS] for additional requirements. > >==> D_ID, S_ID, and Parameter were not described here. I may add them to this list. >typos or very minor nits >------------------------ > >IMSS Working Group Claudio DeSanti > >==> s/Claudio/C./ (that's just a convention, the same at the bottom of >each page :-) > > transmission words that act as frame delimiters. The CRC is 4-octets >==> s/4-/4 / > > The FC Header is 24-octets long and contains several fields >==> s/24-/24 / > > ordering, that corresponds to the standard network byte order or > >==> s/,// (or use "which", typically don't use comma before "that") > >6. Stateless Autoconfiguration > >==> s/Auto/Address Auto/ (similar elsewhere; the formal name is >"stateless address autoconfiguration") > >6.5 Generating an Interface ID from a EUI-64 mapped N_Port_Name > >==> s/a EUI-64/an EUI-64/ (similar elsewhere) > > An Exchange Responder is not required to assign RX_IDs. If a RX_ID >of > >==> s/a RX_ID/an RX_ID/ (similar elsewhere?) > > The Exchange Originator MAY terminate Exchanges by setting the F_CTL > LS bit [FC-FS]. Exchanges MAY be torn down by the Exchange Originator > or Exchange Responder by using the ABTS protocol. IPv6 Exchanges > >==> spell out ABTS, maybe refer to it (the only time the term is used >in this document) I'm ok with all the above editorial comments. A small note on "which" and "that": "which" is almost forbidden in ANSI standards, so I'll remove the comma and keep the "that". Thanks, Claudio. >-- >Pekka Savola "You each name yourselves king, yet the >Netcore Oy kingdom bleeds." >Systems. Networks. Security. -- George R.R. Martin: A Clash of Kings > > > >_______________________________________________ >imss mailing list >imss@ietf.org >https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/imss _______________________________________________ imss mailing list imss@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/imss From exim@www1.ietf.org Thu Nov 20 18:30:18 2003 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id SAA07733 for ; Thu, 20 Nov 2003 18:30:18 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AMyFP-0005NC-4G for imss-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 20 Nov 2003 18:30:03 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id hAKNU3ax020648 for imss-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 20 Nov 2003 18:30:03 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AMyFO-0005Mw-P9 for imss-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Thu, 20 Nov 2003 18:30:02 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id SAA07726 for ; Thu, 20 Nov 2003 18:29:47 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AMyFL-0006gl-00 for imss-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 20 Nov 2003 18:29:59 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AMyFL-0006gi-00 for imss-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 20 Nov 2003 18:29:59 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AMyFN-0005MT-Kk; Thu, 20 Nov 2003 18:30:01 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AMyFD-0005M3-7q for imss@optimus.ietf.org; Thu, 20 Nov 2003 18:29:51 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id SAA07708; Thu, 20 Nov 2003 18:29:36 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AMyFA-0006gK-00; Thu, 20 Nov 2003 18:29:48 -0500 Received: from sj-iport-1-in.cisco.com ([171.71.176.70] helo=sj-iport-1.cisco.com) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AMyF9-0006g1-00; Thu, 20 Nov 2003 18:29:47 -0500 Received: from mira-sjc5-f.cisco.com (IDENT:mirapoint@mira-sjc5-f.cisco.com [171.71.163.13]) by sj-core-1.cisco.com (8.12.9/8.12.6) with ESMTP id hAKNTFAt015091; Thu, 20 Nov 2003 15:29:15 -0800 (PST) Received: from cds-w2k02.andiamo.com (dhcp-171-71-49-41.cisco.com [171.71.49.41]) by mira-sjc5-f.cisco.com (Mirapoint Messaging Server MOS 3.3.6-GR) with ESMTP id AMT24092; Thu, 20 Nov 2003 15:29:14 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <4.3.2.7.2.20031120151330.03892778@mira-sjcd-1.cisco.com> X-Sender: cds@andiamo.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.2 Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2003 15:29:14 -0800 To: Fred Templin From: Claudio DeSanti Subject: Re: [imss] Re: Reminder: IMSS Working Group last call on IPv6 over Fibre Channel Draft Ends Monday Nov 24 Cc: Elizabeth Rodriguez , imss@ietf.org, t11_3@t11.org, ipv6@ietf.org In-Reply-To: <3FBD2E06.4060208@iprg.nokia.com> References: <000901c3af96$6e4e3440$6d01a8c0@EGRodriguez> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: imss-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: imss-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: imss@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Internet and Management Support for Storage Working Group List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Hi Fred, the ~64KB MTU comes from RFC 2625 (IPv4 over Fibre Channel), and one of the goals of the IPv6 over FC specification is to keep unchanged the encapsulation technique between IPv4 and IPv6. I understand that with IPv6 a bridge has no more the option to fragment a too big packet, as in IPv4, but I do not believe this is an issue, because: - router advertisements may announce a proper MTU over a bridged network; - current deployments are almost entirely based on routers instead than on bridges. In any case, if the group believes this to be an issue, then we have the same issue also for RFC 2467 (Transmission of IPv6 Packets over FDDI Networks), where the default MTU is 4352 octets. If it is not a problem there, then it is neither a problem here. Thanks, Claudio. At 01:11 PM 11/20/2003 -0800, Fred Templin wrote: >~64KB MTU L2 media, huh? Sounds interesting. > >Has there been any consideration given to L2 bridging >between FiberChannel and other media such as Gbps >and 10/100 Ethernet, or are you expecting everything >between dissimilar media to go through a router? > >Thanks - Fred >ftemplin@iprg.nokia.com > >Elizabeth Rodriguez wrote: > >>This is a reminder that the FC over IPv6 draft is currently in IMSS working >>group last call. The last call period ends on November 24 at 9pm EST. >> >>The draft may be found at >>www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-imss-ipv6-over-fibre-channel-00.txt >> >>A link to the draft may also be found at the bottom of the IMSS WG home page >>at www.ietf.org/html.charters/imss-charter.html. This page also includes >>instructions on subscribing to the mailing list. >> >>If anyone has comments against this draft, please post them to the IMSS >>mailing list. If the comments are only editorial in nature, they may be >>posted to the mailing list or send directly to the author with copies to the >>chair and technical advisors as indicated below. >> >>The original WG Last Call announcement follows. >> >>Thanks, >>Elizabeth Rodriguez >>IMSS Chair >> >>Note: The URLs above have been verified. If the URLs above do not work for >>you, make sure your mailer has not split the URL over two lines. >> >>-----Original Message----- >>From: imss-admin@ietf.org [mailto:imss-admin@ietf.org] On Behalf Of >>elizabeth.rodriguez@dothill.com >>Sent: Sunday, November 02, 2003 8:59 PM >>To: imss@ietf.org >>Cc: ipv6@ietf.org; t11_3@t11.org; cds@andiamo.com; black_david@emc.com; >>Margaret.Wasserman@nokia.com; bwijnen@lucent.com >>Subject: [imss] IMSS: Working Group last call on IPv6 over Fibre Channel >>Draft >> >>Hello, >> >>I would like to announce the IETF IMSS Working Group last call on the IPv6 >>over Fibre Channel draft. >>The draft may be found at >>http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-imss-ipv6-over-fibre-channel- >>00.txt >>The last call period will end at 9pm EST on Monday, November 24, 2003. >> >>Please address any technical comments to the IMSS mailing list at >>imss@ietf.org. Editorial comments may be made directly to the draft >>author, Claudio >>DeSanti, at cds@andiamo.com. >>Please copy me at elizabeth.rodriguez@dothill.com and our technical >>coordinators for this draft, David Black (black_david@emc.com) and Margaret >>Wasserman (margaret.wasserman@nokia.com). >> >>Summary: >> >>Draft: IPv6 over Fibre Channel >>Draft URL: >>http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-imss-ipv6-over-fibre-channel- >>00.txt >>WGLC ends: Monday, November 24, 2003 at 9pm EST >>Technical comments to: imss@ietf.org >>Editorial comments to: Claudio DeSanti (cds@andiamo.org), David Black >>(black_david@emc.com), Margaret Wasserman (margaret.wasserman@nokia.com) and >>Elizabeth Rodriguez (elizabeth.rodriguez@dothill.com) >> >>Thank you, >> >>Elizabeth Rodriguez >>IMSS Chair >> >>IMSS Charter: http://www.ietf.org/html.charters/imss-charter.html >>To subscribe to the IMSS mailing list, see >>https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/imss >> >>_______________________________________________ >>imss mailing list >>imss@ietf.org >>https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/imss >> >> >> >>-------------------------------------------------------------------- >>IETF IPv6 working group mailing list >>ipv6@ietf.org >>Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 >>-------------------------------------------------------------------- >> > > > >_______________________________________________ >imss mailing list >imss@ietf.org >https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/imss _______________________________________________ imss mailing list imss@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/imss From exim@www1.ietf.org Fri Nov 21 12:51:20 2003 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA24401 for ; Fri, 21 Nov 2003 12:51:20 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1ANFQt-000833-GS for imss-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 21 Nov 2003 12:51:03 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id hALHp32N030933 for imss-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 21 Nov 2003 12:51:03 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1ANFQt-00082q-9E for imss-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Fri, 21 Nov 2003 12:51:03 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA24348 for ; Fri, 21 Nov 2003 12:50:49 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1ANFQr-000672-00 for imss-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 21 Nov 2003 12:51:01 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1ANFQr-00066x-00 for imss-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 21 Nov 2003 12:51:01 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1ANFQs-00082X-C8; Fri, 21 Nov 2003 12:51:02 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1ANFQN-00081b-Q6 for imss@optimus.ietf.org; Fri, 21 Nov 2003 12:50:31 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA24290 for ; Fri, 21 Nov 2003 12:50:17 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1ANFQM-000661-00 for imss@ietf.org; Fri, 21 Nov 2003 12:50:30 -0500 Received: from darkstar.iprg.nokia.com ([205.226.5.69]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1ANFQL-00065d-00 for imss@ietf.org; Fri, 21 Nov 2003 12:50:29 -0500 Received: (from root@localhost) by darkstar.iprg.nokia.com (8.11.0/8.11.0-DARKSTAR) id hALHndO09440; Fri, 21 Nov 2003 09:49:39 -0800 X-mProtect: <200311211749> Nokia Silicon Valley Messaging Protection Received: from walnut2.iprg.nokia.com (205.226.9.199, claiming to be "spruce.nokia.com") by darkstar.iprg.nokia.com smtpdqBEHex; Fri, 21 Nov 2003 09:49:37 PST Message-Id: <4.3.2.7.2.20031121093210.022c6d50@mailhost.iprg.nokia.com> X-Sender: hinden@mailhost.iprg.nokia.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.2 Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2003 09:48:26 -0800 To: Pekka Savola From: Bob Hinden Subject: Re: [imss] IPv6 over FC comments [Re: Reminder: IMSS Working Group last call on IPv6 over Fibre Channel Draft Ends Monday Nov 24] Cc: Elizabeth Rodriguez , imss@ietf.org In-Reply-To: References: <000901c3af96$6e4e3440$6d01a8c0@EGRodriguez> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: imss-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: imss-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: imss@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Internet and Management Support for Storage Working Group List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Pekka, >5. Maximum Transfer Unit > > The default MTU size for IPv6 [IPv6] packets over Fibre Channel is > 65280 octets. This size may be reduced by a Router Advertisement > [DISC] containing an MTU option that specifies a smaller MTU, or by > manual configuration of each Nx_Port. However, as required by [IPv6], > the MTU MUST NOT be lower than 1280 octets. If a Router Advertisement > received on an Nx_Port has an MTU option specifying an MTU larger > than 65280, or larger than a manually configured value, that MTU > option MAY be logged to system management but MUST be otherwise > ignored. > >==> has this been discussed? As long as you use FC e.g. between >storage devices, this is fine, but if you'd use it to access Internet, >this default MTU could be a real pain, because 1500 MTU is de-facto >standard out there in the big I. > >I'd suggest adding non-normative discussion text that clarifies >whichever position you want to make (e.g., describe when you really, >really should to use the MTU option if you stick with the default.) I agree this is a good point. It would also be good to mention that an IPv6 node is not required to reassemble fragments that total more than 1500 bytes. The text from RFC2460: A node must be able to accept a fragmented packet that, after reassembly, is as large as 1500 octets. A node is permitted to accept fragmented packets that reassemble to more than 1500 octets. An upper-layer protocol or application that depends on IPv6 fragmentation to send packets larger than the MTU of a path should not send packets larger than 1500 octets unless it has assurance that the destination is capable of reassembling packets of that larger size. Running when with a MTU larger than 1500 a node can not assume that it can fragment a packet larger than 1500 sent to off link destinations. Also, adding a note to the draft that when running with an MTU larger than 1500, supporting path mtu discovery is a very good idea (i.e., SHOULD++++). To make MTU's larger than 1500 more useful we might want a mode of operation where there was one MTU for on link communication and another MTU for off link communication. As you point out that off link MTU would be 1500 in today's Internet. This isn't something that we have discussed before as far as I can remember. Bob _______________________________________________ imss mailing list imss@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/imss From exim@www1.ietf.org Fri Nov 21 13:33:21 2003 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA25916 for ; Fri, 21 Nov 2003 13:33:20 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1ANG5W-0002uz-Ne for imss-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 21 Nov 2003 13:33:03 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id hALIX2q9011216 for imss-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 21 Nov 2003 13:33:02 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1ANG5W-0002uD-GI for imss-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Fri, 21 Nov 2003 13:33:02 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA25893 for ; Fri, 21 Nov 2003 13:32:49 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1ANG5U-0006jH-00 for imss-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 21 Nov 2003 13:33:00 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1ANG5T-0006j8-00 for imss-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 21 Nov 2003 13:32:59 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1ANG5V-0002tp-6y; Fri, 21 Nov 2003 13:33:01 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AN19w-0008Ai-4G for imss@optimus.ietf.org; Thu, 20 Nov 2003 21:36:36 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id VAA14570 for ; Thu, 20 Nov 2003 21:36:20 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AN19r-0001pL-00 for imss@ietf.org; Thu, 20 Nov 2003 21:36:31 -0500 Received: from netcore.fi ([193.94.160.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AN19r-0001oF-00 for imss@ietf.org; Thu, 20 Nov 2003 21:36:31 -0500 Received: from localhost (pekkas@localhost) by netcore.fi (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id hAL2ZVK20322; Fri, 21 Nov 2003 04:35:31 +0200 Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2003 04:35:31 +0200 (EET) From: Pekka Savola To: Claudio DeSanti cc: Elizabeth Rodriguez , Subject: Re: [imss] IPv6 over FC comments [Re: Reminder: IMSS Working Group last call on IPv6 over Fibre Channel Draft Ends Monday Nov 24] In-Reply-To: <4.3.2.7.2.20031120131705.038a3d90@mira-sjcd-1.cisco.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: imss-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: imss-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: imss@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Internet and Management Support for Storage Working Group List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Hi, Thanks for the very quick reply; I'll have a couple of more comments inline, and cut out the rest.. On Thu, 20 Nov 2003, Claudio DeSanti wrote: > > The default MTU size for IPv6 [IPv6] packets over Fibre Channel is > > 65280 octets. This size may be reduced by a Router Advertisement > > [DISC] containing an MTU option that specifies a smaller MTU, or by > > manual configuration of each Nx_Port. However, as required by [IPv6], > > the MTU MUST NOT be lower than 1280 octets. If a Router Advertisement > > received on an Nx_Port has an MTU option specifying an MTU larger > > than 65280, or larger than a manually configured value, that MTU > > option MAY be logged to system management but MUST be otherwise > > ignored. > > > >==> has this been discussed? As long as you use FC e.g. between > >storage devices, this is fine, but if you'd use it to access Internet, > >this default MTU could be a real pain, because 1500 MTU is de-facto > >standard out there in the big I. > > The 65280 octects MTU size comes from the IPv4 over Fibre Channel > specification, RFC 2625, and one of the goal of the IPv6 over FC spec is to > reuse the encapsulation defined for IPv4. > It is clearly different than the ethernet MTU, but I do not see any > particular issue with this number, considering that both Path MTU discovery > and the MTU option in router advertisements may take care of it. In > particular, I would assume that an IPv6 router connecting a Fibre Channel > fabric with networks of different technologies would announce an > appropriate MTU on the FC side. There is no *specification* problem but there is IMO a very large *operational* problem. Remember that the one thing where v6 differs from v4 is that there is no on the path fragmentation -- you have to rely on PMTUD or have MTU configured correctly; further I'm not sure if PMTUD would be performed only once (for the default route) or for every destination. I hope the first, but even so, such cached state is typically subject to timeouts. So, I'd consider adding some statement after that, like: As the default MTU size far exceeds the message sizes typically used in the Internet, and Path MTU Discovery is a non-optiomal mechanism, extreme care should be observed if connecting a node to Internet using FC; it is critically important to configure the MTU option in the Route Advertisements. (this spec is maybe not 100% correct place for this, but for the lack of a better one... :-) > >==> the doc is not clear (at least to someone not well versed with FC > >:-) what Information Unit refers to; is it "Data field" or "Frame > >payload" in figure 1? There seems to be some confusing text because > >fig 2 shows also the Optional Header but other text discusses this as > >if this was different? > > > >(maybe a terminology section could be considered, but I'm not sure if > >that'd actually help that much..) > > This requirement translates in Fibre Channel terms the IPv6 requirement > that each link must have an MTU equal or greater to 1280 octects. The > number 1304 comes from Figure 2. Yep. > The Information Unit term is introduced in section 2.4, and used in section > 4.1 to explain the IPv6 - FC mapping. I recognize that sometimes I used the > term "Information Unit" and sometimes the term "Sequence payload". Altough > a Fibre Channel person is able to contextualize both terms, a more > consistent terminology may be appropriate here. Thanks -- this will probably be clearer with a bit of rewording. > > Receiving an FC Sequence carrying an IPv6 multicast packet MAY > > trigger some additional processing by the Nx_Port if that IPv6 packet > > requires a reply. In this case, if a valid Port Login to the Nx_Port > > that sent the IPv6 multicast packet does not exist, the Nx_Port MUST > > perform such a Port Login, and then use it for the unicast IPv6 > > reply. In the case of Neighbor Discovery messages [DISC], the > > N_Port_ID to which the Port Login is directed is taken from the > > N_Port_ID field of the Source/Target Link-layer Address option. > > > >==> is it needed to specify "unicast" here? Isn't it at least > >theoretically possible that you'd receive a multicast packet, and want > >to reply with a multicast packet of your own? (similar later in the > >spec) > > I believe we need the unicast word. The case in which you want to reply > with a multicast packet will be handled by the default broadcast login, and > does not require a specific port login to be performed. Right. I know nothing of that :-) .. but how I read the spec was "replies to multicasts are unicasts, if any" -- which need not be true. Maybe worth checking whether minor rewording would clarify that. -- Pekka Savola "You each name yourselves king, yet the Netcore Oy kingdom bleeds." Systems. Networks. Security. -- George R.R. Martin: A Clash of Kings _______________________________________________ imss mailing list imss@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/imss From exim@www1.ietf.org Fri Nov 21 13:33:21 2003 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA25918 for ; Fri, 21 Nov 2003 13:33:21 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1ANG5X-0002vJ-36 for imss-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 21 Nov 2003 13:33:03 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id hALIX33s011231 for imss-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 21 Nov 2003 13:33:03 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1ANG5W-0002ug-Lu for imss-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Fri, 21 Nov 2003 13:33:02 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA25896 for ; Fri, 21 Nov 2003 13:32:49 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1ANG5U-0006jK-00 for imss-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 21 Nov 2003 13:33:00 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1ANG5U-0006jA-00 for imss-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 21 Nov 2003 13:33:00 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1ANG5V-0002u1-AY; Fri, 21 Nov 2003 13:33:01 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AN1hI-0001xz-Cn for imss@optimus.ietf.org; Thu, 20 Nov 2003 22:11:04 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id WAA15277; Thu, 20 Nov 2003 22:10:50 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AN1hF-0002AE-00; Thu, 20 Nov 2003 22:11:01 -0500 Received: from out2.smtp.messagingengine.com ([66.111.4.26]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AN1hE-0002AB-00; Thu, 20 Nov 2003 22:11:00 -0500 Received: from server2.messagingengine.com (server2.internal [10.202.2.133]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AD45543888B; Thu, 20 Nov 2003 22:10:56 -0500 (EST) Received: by server2.messagingengine.com (Postfix, from userid 99) id ECFE37E937; Thu, 20 Nov 2003 22:10:55 -0500 (EST) Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: MIME::Lite 1.2 (F2.71; T1.001; A1.51; B2.12; Q2.03) From: "Chirayu Patel" To: "Claudio DeSanti" , "Fred Templin" Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2003 08:40:55 +0530 X-Sasl-Enc: O0Hv+wy+7plF+vdPxAS4xw 1069384255 Cc: "Elizabeth Rodriguez" , imss@ietf.org, t11_3@t11.org, ipv6@ietf.org Subject: Re: [imss] Re: Reminder: IMSS Working Group last call on IPv6 over Fibre Channel Draft Ends Monday Nov 24 References: <000901c3af96$6e4e3440$6d01a8c0@EGRodriguez> <4.3.2.7.2.20031120151330.03892778@mira-sjcd-1.cisco.com> In-Reply-To: <4.3.2.7.2.20031120151330.03892778@mira-sjcd-1.cisco.com> Message-Id: <20031121031055.ECFE37E937@server2.messagingengine.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: imss-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: imss-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: imss@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Internet and Management Support for Storage Working Group List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Thu, 20 Nov 2003 15:29:14 -0800, "Claudio DeSanti" said: > I understand that with IPv6 a bridge has no more the option to fragment > a too big packet, as in IPv4, but I do not believe this is an issue, > because: > - router advertisements may announce a proper MTU over a bridged > network; ND-proxy draft has the same recommendation for handling MTU within a subnet comprising of multiple L2-technologies. You can find the draft at: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-thaler-ipv6-ndproxy-01.txt Section 4.1.3.3 covers processing of RA's. CP _______________________________________________ imss mailing list imss@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/imss From exim@www1.ietf.org Fri Nov 21 17:57:20 2003 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA10047 for ; Fri, 21 Nov 2003 17:57:19 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1ANKD1-0004qh-Nu for imss-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 21 Nov 2003 17:57:04 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id hALMv3Rd018638 for imss-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 21 Nov 2003 17:57:03 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1ANKD1-0004qX-Iz for imss-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Fri, 21 Nov 2003 17:57:03 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA10036 for ; Fri, 21 Nov 2003 17:56:49 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1ANKCy-0003dU-00 for imss-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 21 Nov 2003 17:57:00 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1ANKCy-0003dR-00 for imss-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 21 Nov 2003 17:57:00 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1ANKD0-0004q7-CC; Fri, 21 Nov 2003 17:57:02 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1ANKCS-0004oM-6i for imss@optimus.ietf.org; Fri, 21 Nov 2003 17:56:28 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA10028 for ; Fri, 21 Nov 2003 17:56:13 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1ANKCP-0003dB-00 for imss@ietf.org; Fri, 21 Nov 2003 17:56:25 -0500 Received: from sj-iport-5.cisco.com ([171.68.10.87]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1ANKCP-0003cc-00 for imss@ietf.org; Fri, 21 Nov 2003 17:56:25 -0500 Received: from cisco.com (171.68.223.138) by sj-iport-5.cisco.com with ESMTP; 21 Nov 2003 14:56:23 -0800 Received: from mira-sjc5-f.cisco.com (IDENT:mirapoint@mira-sjc5-f.cisco.com [171.71.163.13]) by sj-core-4.cisco.com (8.12.6/8.12.6) with ESMTP id hALMtqiN004851; Fri, 21 Nov 2003 14:55:52 -0800 (PST) Received: from cds-w2k02.cisco.com (dhcp-171-71-49-67.cisco.com [171.71.49.67]) by mira-sjc5-f.cisco.com (Mirapoint Messaging Server MOS 3.3.6-GR) with ESMTP id AMU18034; Fri, 21 Nov 2003 14:55:51 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <4.3.2.7.2.20031121121438.038b0900@mira-sjcd-1.cisco.com> X-Sender: cds@mira-sjcd-1.cisco.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.2 Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2003 14:55:39 -0800 To: Bob Hinden From: Claudio DeSanti Subject: Re: [imss] IPv6 over FC comments [Re: Reminder: IMSS Working Group last call on IPv6 over Fibre Channel Draft Ends Monday Nov 24] Cc: Pekka Savola , Elizabeth Rodriguez , imss@ietf.org In-Reply-To: <4.3.2.7.2.20031121093210.022c6d50@mailhost.iprg.nokia.com> References: <000901c3af96$6e4e3440$6d01a8c0@EGRodriguez> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: imss-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: imss-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: imss@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Internet and Management Support for Storage Working Group List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Hi Bob, thanks for your comments. I think we are hitting here a more general problem. FDDI has exactly the same issue, having a default MTU of 4352 octets. May be the following text (taken from RFC 2467, IPv6 over FDDI), plus a strong recommendation that Fibre Channel hosts supporting IPv6 SHOULD also implement PMTU discovery is what that we need. Use of IPv6 in a bridged mixed-media environment must not depend on support from bridges, unless those bridges are known to correctly implement IPv6 Path MTU Discovery [RFC 1981, ICMPV6]. For correct operation when mixed media are bridged together by bridges which do not support IPv6 Path MTU Discovery, the smallest MTU of all the media must be advertised by routers in an MTU option. If there are no routers present, this MTU must be manually configured in each node which is connected to a medium with a default MTU larger than the smallest MTU. Interestingly the "must" in this text are not written as "MUST". Comments? Claudio. At 09:48 AM 11/21/2003 -0800, Bob Hinden wrote: >Pekka, > >>5. Maximum Transfer Unit >> >> The default MTU size for IPv6 [IPv6] packets over Fibre Channel is >> 65280 octets. This size may be reduced by a Router Advertisement >> [DISC] containing an MTU option that specifies a smaller MTU, or by >> manual configuration of each Nx_Port. However, as required by [IPv6], >> the MTU MUST NOT be lower than 1280 octets. If a Router Advertisement >> received on an Nx_Port has an MTU option specifying an MTU larger >> than 65280, or larger than a manually configured value, that MTU >> option MAY be logged to system management but MUST be otherwise >> ignored. >> >>==> has this been discussed? As long as you use FC e.g. between >>storage devices, this is fine, but if you'd use it to access Internet, >>this default MTU could be a real pain, because 1500 MTU is de-facto >>standard out there in the big I. >> >>I'd suggest adding non-normative discussion text that clarifies >>whichever position you want to make (e.g., describe when you really, >>really should to use the MTU option if you stick with the default.) > >I agree this is a good point. It would also be good to mention that an >IPv6 node is not required to reassemble fragments that total more than >1500 bytes. The text from RFC2460: > > A node must be able to accept a fragmented packet that, after > reassembly, is as large as 1500 octets. A node is permitted to > accept fragmented packets that reassemble to more than 1500 octets. > An upper-layer protocol or application that depends on IPv6 > fragmentation to send packets larger than the MTU of a path should > not send packets larger than 1500 octets unless it has assurance that > the destination is capable of reassembling packets of that larger > size. > >Running when with a MTU larger than 1500 a node can not assume that it can >fragment a packet larger than 1500 sent to off link destinations. > >Also, adding a note to the draft that when running with an MTU larger than >1500, supporting path mtu discovery is a very good idea (i.e., SHOULD++++). > >To make MTU's larger than 1500 more useful we might want a mode of >operation where there was one MTU for on link communication and another >MTU for off link communication. As you point out that off link MTU would >be 1500 in today's Internet. This isn't something that we have discussed >before as far as I can remember. > >Bob > > > >_______________________________________________ >imss mailing list >imss@ietf.org >https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/imss _______________________________________________ imss mailing list imss@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/imss From exim@www1.ietf.org Mon Nov 24 13:02:17 2003 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA19176 for ; Mon, 24 Nov 2003 13:02:17 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AOL2A-0004mY-K0 for imss-archive@odin.ietf.org; Mon, 24 Nov 2003 13:02:03 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id hAOI22lQ018381 for imss-archive@odin.ietf.org; Mon, 24 Nov 2003 13:02:02 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AOL2A-0004mO-FB for imss-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Mon, 24 Nov 2003 13:02:02 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA19164 for ; Mon, 24 Nov 2003 13:01:46 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AOL28-0001VG-00 for imss-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 24 Nov 2003 13:02:00 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AOL28-0001VC-00 for imss-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 24 Nov 2003 13:02:00 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AOL29-0004mJ-0y; Mon, 24 Nov 2003 13:02:01 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AOFmh-0005Id-6r for imss@optimus.ietf.org; Mon, 24 Nov 2003 07:25:43 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id HAA05578 for ; Mon, 24 Nov 2003 07:25:29 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AOFmg-0003ID-00 for imss@ietf.org; Mon, 24 Nov 2003 07:25:42 -0500 Received: from netcore.fi ([193.94.160.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AOFmf-0003HH-00 for imss@ietf.org; Mon, 24 Nov 2003 07:25:41 -0500 Received: from localhost (pekkas@localhost) by netcore.fi (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id hAOCNkG23816; Mon, 24 Nov 2003 14:23:46 +0200 Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2003 14:23:46 +0200 (EET) From: Pekka Savola To: Claudio DeSanti cc: Bob Hinden , Elizabeth Rodriguez , Subject: Re: [imss] IPv6 over FC comments [Re: Reminder: IMSS Working Group last call on IPv6 over Fibre Channel Draft Ends Monday Nov 24] In-Reply-To: <4.3.2.7.2.20031121121438.038b0900@mira-sjcd-1.cisco.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: imss-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: imss-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: imss@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Internet and Management Support for Storage Working Group List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Fri, 21 Nov 2003, Claudio DeSanti wrote: > thanks for your comments. I think we are hitting here a more general > problem. FDDI has exactly the same issue, having a default MTU of 4352 octets. > May be the following text (taken from RFC 2467, IPv6 over FDDI), plus a > strong recommendation that Fibre Channel hosts supporting IPv6 SHOULD also > implement PMTU discovery is what that we need. Yep, but RFC 2467 was published 5 years ago, and now we should know better :-) I think Bob's point about different MTU's for "on-link" and "off-link" might be a good idea. Or at least describe issues that might result from the use of a MTU higher than 1500. > For correct operation when mixed media are bridged together by > bridges which do not support IPv6 Path MTU Discovery, the smallest > MTU of all the media must be advertised by routers in an MTU option. > If there are no routers present, this MTU must be manually configured > in each node which is connected to a medium with a default MTU larger > than the smallest MTU. > > Interestingly the "must" in this text are not written as "MUST". > Comments? The reason probably is that the "must" refers to an operational procedure by network administrators, not something IPv6 over FOO implementers can fix. -- Pekka Savola "You each name yourselves king, yet the Netcore Oy kingdom bleeds." Systems. Networks. Security. -- George R.R. Martin: A Clash of Kings _______________________________________________ imss mailing list imss@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/imss From exim@www1.ietf.org Tue Nov 25 14:24:19 2003 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA03397 for ; Tue, 25 Nov 2003 14:24:19 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AOin4-0001Ok-Qe for imss-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 25 Nov 2003 14:24:03 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id hAPJO2I5005355 for imss-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 25 Nov 2003 14:24:02 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AOin4-0001O9-6B for imss-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Tue, 25 Nov 2003 14:24:02 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA03362 for ; Tue, 25 Nov 2003 14:23:47 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AOin1-0003TW-00 for imss-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 25 Nov 2003 14:23:59 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AOin0-0003TQ-00 for imss-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 25 Nov 2003 14:23:58 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AOin2-0001NV-Vb; Tue, 25 Nov 2003 14:24:00 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AOim6-0001Ma-2w for imss@optimus.ietf.org; Tue, 25 Nov 2003 14:23:02 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA03333 for ; Tue, 25 Nov 2003 14:22:47 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AOim3-0003Sl-00 for imss@ietf.org; Tue, 25 Nov 2003 14:22:59 -0500 Received: from sj-iport-5.cisco.com ([171.68.10.87]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AOim2-0003SP-00 for imss@ietf.org; Tue, 25 Nov 2003 14:22:59 -0500 Received: from cisco.com (171.68.223.138) by sj-iport-5.cisco.com with ESMTP; 25 Nov 2003 11:22:16 -0800 Received: from mira-sjc5-f.cisco.com (IDENT:mirapoint@mira-sjc5-f.cisco.com [171.71.163.13]) by sj-core-4.cisco.com (8.12.6/8.12.6) with ESMTP id hAPJMPiN002712; Tue, 25 Nov 2003 11:22:26 -0800 (PST) Received: from cds-w2k02.cisco.com (dhcp-171-71-49-67.cisco.com [171.71.49.67]) by mira-sjc5-f.cisco.com (Mirapoint Messaging Server MOS 3.3.6-GR) with ESMTP id AMW28280; Tue, 25 Nov 2003 11:22:25 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <4.3.2.7.2.20031125111851.038b47e0@mira-sjcd-1.cisco.com> X-Sender: cds@mira-sjcd-1.cisco.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.2 Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2003 11:22:25 -0800 To: Pekka Savola From: Claudio DeSanti Subject: Re: [imss] IPv6 over FC comments [Re: Reminder: IMSS Working Group last call on IPv6 over Fibre Channel Draft Ends Monday Nov 24] Cc: Bob Hinden , Elizabeth Rodriguez , In-Reply-To: References: <4.3.2.7.2.20031121121438.038b0900@mira-sjcd-1.cisco.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: imss-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: imss-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: imss@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Internet and Management Support for Storage Working Group List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Pekka, Bob, I think the following text should capture all the suggestions. Are you ok with it? As the default MTU size far exceeds the message sizes typically used in the Internet, it is strongly recommended that an IPv6 over FC host implement Path MTU Discovery, or at least maintain different MTU values for on-link and off-link destinations. For correct operation in a routed environment, it is important to configure an appropriate MTU option in Router Advertisements. For correct operation when mixed media are bridged together, the smallest MTU of all the media must be advertised by routers in an MTU option. If there are no routers present, this MTU must be manually configured in each node which is connected to a medium with a default MTU larger than the smallest MTU. Thanks, Claudio. At 02:23 PM 11/24/2003 +0200, Pekka Savola wrote: >On Fri, 21 Nov 2003, Claudio DeSanti wrote: > > thanks for your comments. I think we are hitting here a more general > > problem. FDDI has exactly the same issue, having a default MTU of 4352 > octets. > > May be the following text (taken from RFC 2467, IPv6 over FDDI), plus a > > strong recommendation that Fibre Channel hosts supporting IPv6 SHOULD also > > implement PMTU discovery is what that we need. > >Yep, but RFC 2467 was published 5 years ago, and now we should know >better :-) > >I think Bob's point about different MTU's for "on-link" and "off-link" >might be a good idea. Or at least describe issues that might result >from the use of a MTU higher than 1500. > > > For correct operation when mixed media are bridged together by > > bridges which do not support IPv6 Path MTU Discovery, the smallest > > MTU of all the media must be advertised by routers in an MTU option. > > If there are no routers present, this MTU must be manually configured > > in each node which is connected to a medium with a default MTU larger > > than the smallest MTU. > > > > Interestingly the "must" in this text are not written as "MUST". > > Comments? > >The reason probably is that the "must" refers to an operational >procedure by network administrators, not something IPv6 over FOO >implementers can fix. > >-- >Pekka Savola "You each name yourselves king, yet the >Netcore Oy kingdom bleeds." >Systems. Networks. Security. -- George R.R. Martin: A Clash of Kings _______________________________________________ imss mailing list imss@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/imss From exim@www1.ietf.org Tue Nov 25 16:37:20 2003 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA12153 for ; Tue, 25 Nov 2003 16:37:20 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AOkro-0002sk-0y for imss-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 25 Nov 2003 16:37:04 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id hAPLb3Cp011064 for imss-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 25 Nov 2003 16:37:03 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AOkrn-0002sM-Ai for imss-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Tue, 25 Nov 2003 16:37:03 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA12093 for ; Tue, 25 Nov 2003 16:36:48 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AOkrl-00075T-00 for imss-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 25 Nov 2003 16:37:01 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AOkrl-00075Q-00 for imss-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 25 Nov 2003 16:37:01 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AOkrm-0002rp-5m; Tue, 25 Nov 2003 16:37:02 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AOkrc-0002q3-D5 for imss@optimus.ietf.org; Tue, 25 Nov 2003 16:36:52 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA12073 for ; Tue, 25 Nov 2003 16:36:37 -0500 (EST) From: Margaret.Wasserman@nokia.com Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AOkra-00074o-00 for imss@ietf.org; Tue, 25 Nov 2003 16:36:50 -0500 Received: from mgw-x4.nokia.com ([131.228.20.27]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AOkrZ-00074l-00 for imss@ietf.org; Tue, 25 Nov 2003 16:36:49 -0500 Received: from esvir03nok.nokia.com (esvir03nokt.ntc.nokia.com [172.21.143.35]) by mgw-x4.nokia.com (Switch-2.2.8/Switch-2.2.8) with ESMTP id hAPLan613836 for ; Tue, 25 Nov 2003 23:36:49 +0200 (EET) Received: from daebh002.NOE.Nokia.com (unverified) by esvir03nok.nokia.com (Content Technologies SMTPRS 4.2.5) with ESMTP id ; Tue, 25 Nov 2003 23:36:47 +0200 Received: from bsebe001.NOE.Nokia.com ([172.19.160.13]) by daebh002.NOE.Nokia.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.6747); Tue, 25 Nov 2003 15:36:35 -0600 content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.0.6487.1 Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2003 16:36:34 -0500 Message-ID: Thread-Topic: [imss] IPv6 over FC comments [Re: Reminder: IMSS Working Group last call on IPv6 over Fibre Channel Draft Ends Monday Nov 24] Thread-Index: AcOzibpBUbLWrP05Q5+bSDPxUgUPNwAEhj/A To: Cc: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 25 Nov 2003 21:36:35.0505 (UTC) FILETIME=[33654210:01C3B39C] Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: [imss] Review of draft-imss-ipv6-over-fibre-channel-00.txt Sender: imss-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: imss-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: imss@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Internet and Management Support for Storage Working Group List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi Claudio, I reviewed draft-imss-ipv6-over-fibre-channel-00.txt. This is a very clear and well-written document, but I do have a=20 few comments (below). Margaret --- My comments are marked with '>>': Abstract Fibre Channel (FC) is a high speed serial interface technology that = supports several Upper Layer Protocols including Small Computer=20 System Interface (SCSI) and IPv4, as specified in [IPFC]. The purpose of this document is to specify a way of encapsulating IP=20 version 6 [IPv6] over Fibre Channel and to describe a method of=20 forming IPv6 link-local addresses [AARCH] and statelessly=20 autoconfigured addresses on Fibre Channel networks. This document=20 also describes the content of the Source/Target Link-layer Address=20 option used in Neighbor Discovery [DISC] when the messages are=20 transmitted on a Fibre Channel network. >> References are not allowed in an abstract. >> Although the abstract states that this document will describe >> the contents of the ND link-layer address options, I couldn't >> find that description in the actual document.=20 From an IPv6 point of view, a Fibre Channel network, built with any=20 combination of the FC topologies described above, is an IPv6 Link=20 [IPv6] connecting any IPv6-capable Nx_Port acting as an IPv6=20 Interface. >> I don't understand the last part of the above sentence. >> If I understand the first part of the sentence properly,=20 >> it says that an entire FC network will be seen as a single >> IPv6 link. What does the second part mean? _______________________________________________ imss mailing list imss@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/imss From exim@www1.ietf.org Tue Nov 25 16:58:17 2003 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA13035 for ; Tue, 25 Nov 2003 16:58:17 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AOlC5-0004Nr-EH for imss-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 25 Nov 2003 16:58:01 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id hAPLw1YK016847 for imss-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 25 Nov 2003 16:58:01 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AOlC5-0004Ne-A8 for imss-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Tue, 25 Nov 2003 16:58:01 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA13009 for ; Tue, 25 Nov 2003 16:57:46 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AOlC3-0007Zr-00 for imss-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 25 Nov 2003 16:57:59 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AOlC2-0007Zo-00 for imss-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 25 Nov 2003 16:57:58 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AOlC4-0004NZ-EB; Tue, 25 Nov 2003 16:58:00 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AOlBh-0004NA-Ar for imss@optimus.ietf.org; Tue, 25 Nov 2003 16:57:37 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA13006 for ; Tue, 25 Nov 2003 16:57:22 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AOlBf-0007ZK-00 for imss@ietf.org; Tue, 25 Nov 2003 16:57:35 -0500 Received: from sj-iport-4.cisco.com ([171.68.10.86]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AOlBe-0007Yu-00 for imss@ietf.org; Tue, 25 Nov 2003 16:57:34 -0500 Received: from mira-sjc5-f.cisco.com (IDENT:mirapoint@mira-sjc5-f.cisco.com [171.71.163.13]) by sj-core-2.cisco.com (8.12.9/8.12.6) with ESMTP id hAPLv2w5029616; Tue, 25 Nov 2003 13:57:02 -0800 (PST) Received: from cds-w2k02.cisco.com (dhcp-171-71-49-67.cisco.com [171.71.49.67]) by mira-sjc5-f.cisco.com (Mirapoint Messaging Server MOS 3.3.6-GR) with ESMTP id AMW46801; Tue, 25 Nov 2003 13:57:00 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <4.3.2.7.2.20031125134805.037281d8@mira-sjcd-1.cisco.com> X-Sender: cds@mira-sjcd-1.cisco.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.2 Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2003 13:57:00 -0800 To: From: Claudio DeSanti Cc: In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Subject: [imss] Re: Review of draft-imss-ipv6-over-fibre-channel-00.txt Sender: imss-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: imss-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: imss@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Internet and Management Support for Storage Working Group List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Hi Margaret, thanks for your review. See in-line my replies. Claudio. At 04:36 PM 11/25/2003 -0500, Margaret.Wasserman@nokia.com wrote: >Hi Claudio, > >I reviewed draft-imss-ipv6-over-fibre-channel-00.txt. This >is a very clear and well-written document, but I do have a >few comments (below). > >Margaret > >--- > >My comments are marked with '>>': > >Abstract > > Fibre Channel (FC) is a high speed serial interface technology that > supports several Upper Layer Protocols including Small Computer > System Interface (SCSI) and IPv4, as specified in [IPFC]. > The purpose of this document is to specify a way of encapsulating IP > version 6 [IPv6] over Fibre Channel and to describe a method of > forming IPv6 link-local addresses [AARCH] and statelessly > autoconfigured addresses on Fibre Channel networks. This document > also describes the content of the Source/Target Link-layer Address > option used in Neighbor Discovery [DISC] when the messages are > transmitted on a Fibre Channel network. > > >> References are not allowed in an abstract. I'll fix that. > >> Although the abstract states that this document will describe > >> the contents of the ND link-layer address options, I couldn't > >> find that description in the actual document. It is described in section 8, Address Mapping for Unicast. > From an IPv6 point of view, a Fibre Channel network, built with any > combination of the FC topologies described above, is an IPv6 Link > [IPv6] connecting any IPv6-capable Nx_Port acting as an IPv6 > Interface. > > >> I don't understand the last part of the above sentence. > >> If I understand the first part of the sentence properly, > >> it says that an entire FC network will be seen as a single > >> IPv6 link. What does the second part mean? The purpose of this sentence is to map the IPv6 terminology, as defined in RFC 2460, into the Fibre Channel terminology. As you correctly understood, the first part of the sentence states that a Fibre Channel network is what IPv6 calls a "link". The second part of the sentence says (or want to say) that an IPv6-capable Nx_Port is what IPv6 calls an "interface". _______________________________________________ imss mailing list imss@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/imss From exim@www1.ietf.org Tue Nov 25 17:30:19 2003 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA14517 for ; Tue, 25 Nov 2003 17:30:19 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AOlh6-0006Wj-2g for imss-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 25 Nov 2003 17:30:04 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id hAPMU4vx025088 for imss-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 25 Nov 2003 17:30:04 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AOlh5-0006WU-Lj for imss-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Tue, 25 Nov 2003 17:30:03 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA14511 for ; Tue, 25 Nov 2003 17:29:48 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AOlh3-0000fe-00 for imss-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 25 Nov 2003 17:30:01 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AOlh2-0000fb-00 for imss-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 25 Nov 2003 17:30:00 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AOlh4-0006Vz-Hf; Tue, 25 Nov 2003 17:30:02 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AOlgZ-0006VG-93 for imss@optimus.ietf.org; Tue, 25 Nov 2003 17:29:31 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA14497 for ; Tue, 25 Nov 2003 17:29:16 -0500 (EST) From: Margaret.Wasserman@nokia.com Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AOlgW-0000fJ-00 for imss@ietf.org; Tue, 25 Nov 2003 17:29:28 -0500 Received: from mgw-x1.nokia.com ([131.228.20.21]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AOlgW-0000fG-00 for imss@ietf.org; Tue, 25 Nov 2003 17:29:28 -0500 Received: from esvir01nok.ntc.nokia.com (esvir01nokt.ntc.nokia.com [172.21.143.33]) by mgw-x1.nokia.com (Switch-2.2.8/Switch-2.2.8) with ESMTP id hAPMTRA14978 for ; Wed, 26 Nov 2003 00:29:28 +0200 (EET) Received: from daebh001.NOE.Nokia.com (unverified) by esvir01nok.ntc.nokia.com (Content Technologies SMTPRS 4.2.5) with ESMTP id ; Wed, 26 Nov 2003 00:29:27 +0200 Received: from bsebe001.NOE.Nokia.com ([172.19.160.13]) by daebh001.NOE.Nokia.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.6747); Tue, 25 Nov 2003 14:28:41 -0800 content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.0.6487.1 Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2003 17:28:40 -0500 Message-ID: Thread-Topic: Review of draft-imss-ipv6-over-fibre-channel-00.txt Thread-Index: AcOznxMN61ZCY6RxRKS9vbFiA2t6lAAA/qEw To: Cc: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 25 Nov 2003 22:28:41.0193 (UTC) FILETIME=[7A736590:01C3B3A3] Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: [imss] RE: Review of draft-imss-ipv6-over-fibre-channel-00.txt Sender: imss-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: imss-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: imss@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Internet and Management Support for Storage Working Group List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable > > >> Although the abstract states that this document will describe > > >> the contents of the ND link-layer address options, I couldn't > > >> find that description in the actual document. >=20 > It is described in section 8, Address Mapping for Unicast. Indeed it is! I don't understand how I missed that... I even checked the option to make sure that it was correctly formed. Sorry. > The purpose of this sentence is to map the IPv6 terminology,=20 > as defined in=20 > RFC 2460, into the Fibre Channel terminology. As you=20 > correctly understood,=20 > the first part of the sentence states that a Fibre Channel=20 > network is what=20 > IPv6 calls a "link". The second part of the sentence says (or=20 > want to say)=20 > that an IPv6-capable Nx_Port is what IPv6 calls an "interface". Okay, that makes sense. I'd break this out into two sentences, though and be more explicit. Overall, I want to thank you for doing an excellent job in=20 writing this document. Margaret _______________________________________________ imss mailing list imss@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/imss From exim@www1.ietf.org Tue Nov 25 17:49:18 2003 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA15199 for ; Tue, 25 Nov 2003 17:49:18 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AOlzS-0008LQ-VV for imss-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 25 Nov 2003 17:49:03 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id hAPMn211032075 for imss-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 25 Nov 2003 17:49:02 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AOlzS-0008LG-OL for imss-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Tue, 25 Nov 2003 17:49:02 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA15167 for ; Tue, 25 Nov 2003 17:48:47 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AOlzQ-0001Bw-00 for imss-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 25 Nov 2003 17:49:00 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AOlzP-0001Bt-00 for imss-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 25 Nov 2003 17:48:59 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AOlzR-0008Kz-Nf; Tue, 25 Nov 2003 17:49:01 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AOlz3-0008Hc-Lg for imss@optimus.ietf.org; Tue, 25 Nov 2003 17:48:37 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA15140 for ; Tue, 25 Nov 2003 17:48:22 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AOlyy-0001B3-00 for imss@ietf.org; Tue, 25 Nov 2003 17:48:32 -0500 Received: from sj-iport-4.cisco.com ([171.68.10.86]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AOlyx-0001AK-00 for imss@ietf.org; Tue, 25 Nov 2003 17:48:31 -0500 Received: from mira-sjc5-f.cisco.com (IDENT:mirapoint@mira-sjc5-f.cisco.com [171.71.163.13]) by sj-core-2.cisco.com (8.12.9/8.12.6) with ESMTP id hAPMlxw5016166; Tue, 25 Nov 2003 14:48:00 -0800 (PST) Received: from cds-w2k02.cisco.com (dhcp-171-71-49-67.cisco.com [171.71.49.67]) by mira-sjc5-f.cisco.com (Mirapoint Messaging Server MOS 3.3.6-GR) with ESMTP id AMW52368; Tue, 25 Nov 2003 14:47:59 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <4.3.2.7.2.20031125144538.038cef40@mira-sjcd-1.cisco.com> X-Sender: cds@mira-sjcd-1.cisco.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.2 Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2003 14:47:58 -0800 To: From: Claudio DeSanti Cc: In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Subject: [imss] RE: Review of draft-imss-ipv6-over-fibre-channel-00.txt Sender: imss-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: imss-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: imss@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Internet and Management Support for Storage Working Group List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Thanks Margaret. Do you find the following rewording for that sentence adequate? From an IPv6 point of view, a Fibre Channel network, built with any combination of the FC topologies described above, is an IPv6 Link [IPv6]. IPv6-capable Nx_Ports are what [IPv6] calls Interfaces. Thanks, Claudio. At 05:28 PM 11/25/2003 -0500, Margaret.Wasserman@nokia.com wrote: > > > >> Although the abstract states that this document will describe > > > >> the contents of the ND link-layer address options, I couldn't > > > >> find that description in the actual document. > > > > It is described in section 8, Address Mapping for Unicast. > >Indeed it is! I don't understand how I missed that... I even checked >the option to make sure that it was correctly formed. Sorry. > > > The purpose of this sentence is to map the IPv6 terminology, > > as defined in > > RFC 2460, into the Fibre Channel terminology. As you > > correctly understood, > > the first part of the sentence states that a Fibre Channel > > network is what > > IPv6 calls a "link". The second part of the sentence says (or > > want to say) > > that an IPv6-capable Nx_Port is what IPv6 calls an "interface". > >Okay, that makes sense. I'd break this out into two sentences, though >and be more explicit. > >Overall, I want to thank you for doing an excellent job in >writing this document. > >Margaret _______________________________________________ imss mailing list imss@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/imss From exim@www1.ietf.org Tue Nov 25 17:50:17 2003 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA15259 for ; Tue, 25 Nov 2003 17:50:17 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AOm0Q-0008SA-IG for imss-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 25 Nov 2003 17:50:02 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id hAPMo2bx032488 for imss-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 25 Nov 2003 17:50:02 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AOm0Q-0008Rv-Dg for imss-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Tue, 25 Nov 2003 17:50:02 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA15240 for ; Tue, 25 Nov 2003 17:49:46 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AOm0N-0001Dr-00 for imss-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 25 Nov 2003 17:49:59 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AOm0N-0001Do-00 for imss-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 25 Nov 2003 17:49:59 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AOm0P-0008RP-7Q; Tue, 25 Nov 2003 17:50:01 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AOlzv-0008QL-Bf for imss@optimus.ietf.org; Tue, 25 Nov 2003 17:49:31 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA15180 for ; Tue, 25 Nov 2003 17:49:15 -0500 (EST) From: Margaret.Wasserman@nokia.com Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AOlzs-0001Ce-00 for imss@ietf.org; Tue, 25 Nov 2003 17:49:28 -0500 Received: from mgw-x1.nokia.com ([131.228.20.21]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AOlzr-0001CZ-00 for imss@ietf.org; Tue, 25 Nov 2003 17:49:28 -0500 Received: from esvir01nok.ntc.nokia.com (esvir01nokt.ntc.nokia.com [172.21.143.33]) by mgw-x1.nokia.com (Switch-2.2.8/Switch-2.2.8) with ESMTP id hAPMnQA03636 for ; Wed, 26 Nov 2003 00:49:27 +0200 (EET) Received: from daebh002.NOE.Nokia.com (unverified) by esvir01nok.ntc.nokia.com (Content Technologies SMTPRS 4.2.5) with ESMTP id ; Wed, 26 Nov 2003 00:49:26 +0200 Received: from bsebe001.NOE.Nokia.com ([172.19.160.13]) by daebh002.NOE.Nokia.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.6747); Tue, 25 Nov 2003 16:48:54 -0600 content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.0.6487.1 Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2003 17:48:53 -0500 Message-ID: Thread-Topic: Review of draft-imss-ipv6-over-fibre-channel-00.txt Thread-Index: AcOzpjDt+yiCVHXeT7WItsTLVq0DwwAABL+A To: Cc: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 25 Nov 2003 22:48:54.0471 (UTC) FILETIME=[4D9EED70:01C3B3A6] Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: [imss] RE: Review of draft-imss-ipv6-over-fibre-channel-00.txt Sender: imss-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: imss-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: imss@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Internet and Management Support for Storage Working Group List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable That's perfect, Claudio. Thanks! Margaret > -----Original Message----- > From: ext Claudio DeSanti [mailto:cds@cisco.com] > Sent: Tuesday, November 25, 2003 5:48 PM > To: Wasserman Margaret (NRC/Boston) > Cc: imss@ietf.org > Subject: RE: Review of draft-imss-ipv6-over-fibre-channel-00.txt >=20 >=20 > Thanks Margaret. >=20 > Do you find the following rewording for that sentence adequate? >=20 > From an IPv6 point of view, a Fibre Channel network, built with any > combination of the FC topologies described above, is an IPv6 Link > [IPv6]. IPv6-capable Nx_Ports are what [IPv6] calls Interfaces. >=20 > Thanks, >=20 > Claudio. >=20 >=20 > At 05:28 PM 11/25/2003 -0500, Margaret.Wasserman@nokia.com wrote: >=20 > > > > >> Although the abstract states that this document will describe > > > > >> the contents of the ND link-layer address options, I couldn't > > > > >> find that description in the actual document. > > > > > > It is described in section 8, Address Mapping for Unicast. > > > >Indeed it is! I don't understand how I missed that... I=20 > even checked > >the option to make sure that it was correctly formed. Sorry. > > > > > The purpose of this sentence is to map the IPv6 terminology, > > > as defined in > > > RFC 2460, into the Fibre Channel terminology. As you > > > correctly understood, > > > the first part of the sentence states that a Fibre Channel > > > network is what > > > IPv6 calls a "link". The second part of the sentence says (or > > > want to say) > > > that an IPv6-capable Nx_Port is what IPv6 calls an "interface". > > > >Okay, that makes sense. I'd break this out into two=20 > sentences, though > >and be more explicit. > > > >Overall, I want to thank you for doing an excellent job in > >writing this document. > > > >Margaret >=20 >=20 _______________________________________________ imss mailing list imss@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/imss