Subject: FCIP: 12/19 Teleconference Minutes

From: "Murali Rajagopal" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2001 10:24:58 -0800

Minutes submitted by Kha Sin Teow, Brocade

Roll call:

Andy
Neil,
Ralph
elizabeth,
jim nelson
raj
anil
ken hirata,
milan merhar,
brett ketcham, cnt
venkat,
dave peterson
khasin
bill krieg
don fraser

Agenda
------
- SF Security
-Model
-draft comments

1) Security - short frame
- D. Black's response - ok if the nonce is 64-bit as mentioned in Ralph's
write-up. But he (David) reserved the right to review the detailed
description.

2) IESG Plenary Report from Elizabeth
  - one person expressed a very strong objection to the principle of design
team (authors)

  - another comment about should be single author; no long author list

3) Comments to the latest docs - deadline

  - FC-BB meeting is in 1st week of Feb last call of FC-IP cannot proceed
until until BB approval (plenary)

  - why is this an issue since Annex E has at least 12-13 items that are NOT
completely stable? (Venkat)

  - Murali pointed out that the procedure is that BB-2 needs to be approved
during the BB meeting; not outside

 -  If  IPS Chairs has issues with BB-2 not procedurally approved the short
frame proposal just yet and not pass the last call, we   should try to go
with the last call.

4)  Model - (Andy) model that Murali sent on on Dec 19 afternoon

- Andy objects to the model of suggesting that there is one VE_Port to
multi-link to another VE_POrt (not consistent with Fig 4 of the fcip draft);
the intent of the model is not to imply that (Venkat and Ralph and Murali);
so maybe the model should be changed editorially or some verbage be added to
BB; so andy is ok with it then other then editorial mod. VE_Port and LEP -
one to one

- Anil: draft makes no mention of mutliple fcip entity pairs - Ralph is
leary about adding more varbage;

- Murali will post the model to the T11 reflector since there has been no
visibility since Austin

- 598v2 - show BPort and E_Port interaction also deal with talk to VE_Port.
Need to understand B_Port. FCIP doesn't talk  about  B_port and E_Port.; no
need to - that's FC entities problem and the intelligence behind which is
covered in BB

5) comments on the draft

 - figure 5: need to add text about the "bundling" of the 3 tcp connections.

- Murali: need to state/explain about multiple fcip links between multiple
pairs of fcip entities; Ralph to come up with something in 5.2.

-  Anil: left over about IP address - to be replace with "FC-IP Identifier"
do we need FC-IP Identifier?

-Bob Snively to explain why the Id is necessary; also why the short frame -
src has wwpn and fcip-id but dest don't have the fcip-id. would WWPN be
sufficient?

 - Don will review all occurances of "close the (TCP) connection" and
determine if it is appropropriate to add a phrase similar to "close and
report back to the FC fabric". This is to keep the FCIP work in line with
proposed changes to FC-BB-2 that will require notification from a gateawy on
loss of the intersite linl.

- suggestion to delete (6) from section 4.

6) Next Meeting: Jan 2/2002 - next meeting - to be hosted by Don