Subject: [Ips] FINAL Minn. minutes

From: [email-masked]
Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2005 11:08:00 -0500

Having seen no comments, the DRAFT minutes are now the
FINAL minutes, and the decisions that were based on
the sense of the room in Minneapolis are now the rough
consensus of the IPS WG.

Thanks,
--David
----------------------------------------------------
David L. Black, Senior Technologist
EMC Corporation, 176 South St., Hopkinton, MA  01748
+1 (508) 293-7953             FAX: +1 (508) 293-7786
[email-masked]        Mobile: +1 (978) 394-7754
----------------------------------------------------

> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]] On 
> Behalf Of [email-masked]
> Sent: Tuesday, March 15, 2005 8:36 AM
> To: [email-masked]
> Subject: [Ips] DRAFT Minn. minutes
> 
> Sending to the correct list this time ...
> 
> Send corrections to me and/or the list.  With the
> exception of the administrative/procedural matters
> on the iSER over InfiniBand draft, all of the decisions
> here reflect the sense of the room in Minneapolis, and
> may be objected to or commented upon on the list.  In
> the absence of objection, the sense of the room in
> Minneapolis will be the rough consensus of the IPS WG.
> 
> Thanks,
> --David
> 
> The IP Storage (ips) WG met 0900-1130 on Tuesday,
> March 8 at the IETF meetings in Minneapolis, MN.
> 
> MINUTES (DRAFT)
> ---------------
> 
> Administrivia, agenda bashing, draft status review, etc.: 15 min
> 		David L. Black, EMC (co-chair)
> 	Blue sheets
> 	Note Well
> 	Milestones
> 		Out of date on web site.  Update discussion postponed to
> 		end of meeting.
> 
> 	Draft status
> 		All non-MIB drafts except iSER and DA are RFCs or in
> 		RFC Editor's queue.
> 	
> 		Elizabeth Rodriguez (co-chair) continues to work with
> 		authors on resolving expert review comments on remaining
> 		MIBs.  FC Management MIB has finally made it through this
> 		process, new versions of iSCSI and iSCSI Authorization MIBs
> 		coming soon.  iSNS MIB has expired from Internet Draft
servers,
> 		new version expected shortly.
> 
> 		iSER and DA status discussion postponed to end of meeting.
> 
> iSER and DA: 45min  Mike Ko, IBM
> 	(draft-ietf-ips-iser-01.txt)
> 	(draft-ietf-ips-iwarp-da-01.txt)
> 	iSER = iSCSI Extensions for RDMA
> 	DA = Datamover Architecture for iSCSI
> 
> 	No open technical issues on DA draft - it's ready for WG Last Call.
> 
> 	The open issues on the iSER draft centered on the new
> 	MaxOutstandingUnexpectedPDUs key.  The key needs to be specified
> 	so that if the sender violates it (sends too many Unexpected PDUs),
> 	the receiver is *allowed* to drop the connection, but is *not
> 	required* to drop it.
> 
> 	There was a long discussion on when an unsolicited NOP can be
> 	considered "retired" and its "Unexpected PDU" credit can be
> 	safely reused by the sender.  Pat Thaler will send detailed text
> 	to specify this to the list.
> 
> 	The draft needs to add advice to implementers on how to deal with
> 	potentially tight target limits on unexpected immediate commands
> 	- the basic idea is to send non-immediate commands, which aren't
> 	subject to the limit, and can cause some preceding immediate
commands
> 	to be considered "retired".
> 
> 	The details of the specification of the MaxOutstandingUnexpectedPDUs
> 	key will be:
> 		Default: "None" (4 letter text string, indicating no limit)
> 		Minimum allowed value: 2
> 		Maximum allowed value: 2^32 - 1
> 
> 	Section 8 of the iSER contains some considerable changes for which
> 	the details matter - WG members are asked to review it carefully.
> 
> 	The X# syntax will not be used with keys added by iSER - they
> 	will be specified by the iSER draft when it becomes a Proposed
Standard
> 	RFC (as a modification of the iSCSI RFC, 3720), hence IANA does
> 	not need to register the new iSER keys, and they should not be
> 	described as "extension keys".
> 
> 	Schedule discussion on these drafts deferred to after next agenda
item.
> 
> iSER over InfiniBand: up to 1 hour 30min  John Hufferd, IBM
> 	draft-hufferd-ips-iser-sctp-ib-00.{txt,pdf}
> 
> 	This draft is a proposal to generalize iSER to non-TCP RDMA
transports.
> 	There are no changes to iSER over TCP.
> 
> 	The draft requests several changes:
> 	1) Generalize terms/wording in iSER to allow non-TCP RDMA transports
> 		such as RDDP/SCTP and InfiniBand's RDMA service (with RC).
> 		This includes a redefinition of iWARP to encompass SCTP.
> 	2) Generalize wording in iSER to allow a transport to start in
> 		native RDMA mode (with Sends for messages) as opposed to
> 		TCP starting in Stream mode and switching to the RDDP native
> 		RDMA mode.
> 	3) Add some sections on how InfiniBand RDMA works as an example.
> 	4) Extend iSCSI discovery mechanisms to support different
transports.
> 	5) Exempt non-IP transports (e.g., InfiniBand) from "MUST implement
> 		IPsec" requirements.
> 
> 	There were a number of administrative/procedural matters raised by
> 	these requests that were dealt with the WG co-chair (in consultation
> 	with the Area Director (Allison Mankin) in some cases:
> 
> 	a) Item 5) was rejected - the IETF will not approve a blanket
exemption
> 	of usage of a protocol from security requirements.  The right
approach
> 	is to refer to RFC 3723 for the security concerns that apply to
iSCSI,
> 	and draft text to require that they are addressed as appropriate in
> 	different transport environments.
> 
> 	b) The authors of this draft have no plans for a draft on iSCSI over
> 	SCTP without iSER.  Absent such a draft, iSCSI/iSER/SCTP cannot
> 	be specified, and hence should be removed from the proposal.  NB:
> 	subsequent list discussion has indicated possible interest in
> 	writing an iSCSI over SCTP (without iSER) draft, which would make
> 	it possible to specify iSCSI/iSER/SCTP.
> 
> 	c) Infiniband-specific issues, such as dealing with possible lack of
> 	ZBTO support should be dealt with in the InfiniBand Trade
Association,
> 	not the IETF.
> 
> 	d) The RDMAP and DDP drafts have passed WG Last Call in the RDDP WG
> 	with a definition of "iWARP" that is TCP-only (does not include
SCTP).
> 	The usage of the term "iWARP" in this (ips) WG must respect that
> 	usage in the RDDP WG, and hence generalizing "iWARP" beyond TCP is
> 	not appropriate.
> 
> 	At this point, discussion proceeded to the main issue - whether
> 	rough consensus exists in the IPS WG to change the iSER draft to
> 	accommodate to-be-specified usage of iSER over InfiniBand.  Making
> 	these changes will likely result in delaying iSER while the details
> 	of the expanded support (e.g., protocol selection information in
> 	discovery) are worked out.
> 
> 	After the discussion, based on a show of hands in the room, the
> 	WG co-chair running the meeting determined that rough consensus
> 	to make these changes does not exist, and hence the iSER draft will
> 	proceed to WG Last Call without any changes proposed in this draft.
> 	During WG Last Call, it will be possible to re-raise these proposed
> 	changes as WG Last Call comments for further discussion.
> 
> 	Given this situation, all InfiniBand-specific material for iSER
> 	should be submitted as a separate individual submission draft (or
> 	multiple individual submission drafts) that make changes to (update)
> 	the main iSER draft and the iSCSI discovery mechanism drafts/RFCs as
> 	necessary. 	Whether and what of these proposals to adopt as
official
> 	IPS WG work items will be considered at the Paris meeting in early
> 	August.
> 
> 	Based on this, the planned schedule is to issue a WG Last Call for
> 	the DA and iSER drafts in April - authors should prepare versions
> 	ready for WG Last Call by April 15 (tax day), and the WG Last Call
> 	will follow the conclusion of the imminent WG Last Call in the RDDP
> 	WG for the remaining drafts there.
> 
> 	The IPS WG milestones have been accordingly revised to:
> 
> 	Jul 05	Submit iSER (iSCSI Extensions for RDMA) and DA
> 				(Datamover Architecture) drafts to IESG
> 	Aug 05  	Submit all remaining MIB drafts to IESG
> 	Sep 05  	Review with ADs what (if any) additional work the
> 				WG should undertake
> 
> 	In other words, the intent is to complete the iSER and DA drafts
> 	on the mailing list before the Paris meeting (first week of August).
> 	The Paris meeting will be used to resolve any final MIB issues and
> 	discuss proposed InfiniBand and SCTP extensions to iSCSI and iSER,
> 	with charter revision to follow (Sep) if any of these extensions
> 	are added to the IP Storage (ips) WG's program of work.
> 
> 
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------
> David L. Black, Senior Technologist
> EMC Corporation, 176 South St., Hopkinton, MA  01748
> +1 (508) 293-7953             FAX: +1 (508) 293-7786
> [email-masked]        Mobile: +1 (978) 394-7754
> ----------------------------------------------------

_______________________________________________
Ips mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ips