Subject: IPS: Atlanta agenda

From: [email-masked]
Date: Thu, 7 Nov 2002 01:23:24 -0500

Here's the agenda for Atlanta.  Elizabeth and I need to
see any additional requests for time ASAP, as this will
be finalized in the next few days.  We do not anticipate
using the entire 2 hour time slot, so there should be
time at the end of the meeting for questions/concerns/etc.
about drafts that are not on the agenda (e.g., have
completed WG Last Call).

Thanks, --David

IETF IP Storage (IPS) Working Group
Atlanta IETF Meeting, November 18-21, 2002
-------------------------------------------

CHAIRS:
	David L. Black <[email-masked]>
	Elizabeth Rodriguez <[email-masked]>  **NEW EMAIL**

AGENDA: SUBJECT TO CHANGE

Announcement:  The IPS WG's work program is close to complete.  All
remaining
	WG drafts will go to WG Last Call shortly after Atlanta at the
latest.

Most of the IPS WG drafts are NOT listed on this agenda as their
authors and WG co-chairs are not aware of any open technical
issues requiring meeting time to discuss, and most have completed
WG Last Call.

---- Monday, November 18, 1300-1500 ----

- Agenda Bashing and Administrivia (15 min)
	- BLUE SHEETS
	- NOTE WELL
	- Status of drafts
	- Future of IPS WG (chairs and ADs)

- SCSI MIB (15 min) draft-ietf-ips-scsi-mib-04.txt
	Structure diagram available at:
ftp://ftpeng.cisco.com/mbakke/ips/scsi-mib/Visio-scsi-uml-model-01.pdf
	Diagram showing relationships among SCSI family of MIBS available
at:
ftp://ftpeng.cisco.com/mbakke/ips/scsi-mib/Visio-scsi-mib-family-01.pdf

- DHC support for iSCSI boot failure notification (15 min)
	draft-bakke-dhc-snmp-trap-00.txt

	If this draft is to go forward, it will do so in the DHC WG, but
	it's on the IPS agenda to discuss the problem and proposed approach
	to solving it.

- NAA naming format for iSCSI (30 min) draft-krueger-iscsi-name-ext-00.txt
	This draft proposes to add a new .naa naming format to iSCSI in
	addition to the current .iqn and .eui formats.  A significant
	motivation for this is an desire by T10 (ANSI organization that
	handles SCSI standards) to obtain consistent SCSI device
	naming across SCSI transports.

	The authors request that the IPS WG adopt this draft as an official
	work item.  It would become a separate RFC rather than being folded
	into the main iSCSI draft.

DESCRIPTION:

	The IP Storage WG works on using IP-based networks to transport
block storage
	traffic.  See http://www.ietf.org/html.charters/ips-charter.html

---

From: "Randy Jennings" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 7 Nov 2002 08:50:21 -0800

I will not be in the Atlanta meeting, so I will have to open this can of
worms here.

>	into the main iSCSI draft.
I first want to say that whether the NAA naming format is adopted or not
does not matter to me, but it matters to me if the following text is
left in the Proposed Standard version of the iSCSI draft:

(pg39, line from start of document 2340)
   As these two naming authority designators will suffice in nearly
   every case for both software and hardware-based entities, the
   creation of additional type designators is prohibited.

Now, it does not use the MUST language required by IETF drafts (as I
understand it), but prohibited is a strong word for me.  (On a side
note, it would be interesting to open up a thesaurus and search for
other such words in the draft (i.e. 'mandatory').)

I do not want to see a sorry chap reading this draft, see the word
'prohibited' and not ever worry about another name format ever being
made.  It gives this nice sense of (false?) security that made me like
math and standards in the first place.

Sincerely,
Randy Jennings
Data Transit

---

From: "Mallikarjun C." <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 7 Nov 2002 21:42:27 -0800

Good catch.

The statement would need to be modified to state that: this version
of the iSCSI draft allows only two name type designators, and using
user-defined name type designators is prohibited.

Implementations complying with the iSCSI RFC would then support
only those two formats, while new name formats may in addition be
supported based on compliance to additional RFCs, as may be approved 
by the WG from time to time.

Thanks.
--
Mallikarjun

Mallikarjun Chadalapaka
Networked Storage Architecture
Network Storage Solutions
Hewlett-Packard MS 5668 
Roseville CA 95747
[email-masked]