Subject: Re: [nfsv4] FedFS documents ready for WG last call?

From: James Lentini <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 1 Oct 2010 09:28:08 -0400 (EDT)

On Fri, 1 Oct 2010, Spencer Shepler wrote:

> 
> [addressing the FedFS design team]
> 
> Given the progress and the scope of issues being raised for the FedFS admin and protocol I-Ds
> it seems as though it may be time to do a WG last call for the two documents.
> Am I reading this correctly?
> 
> If so, I would like to suggest that we run a WG last call on the documents prior
> to the Beijing meeting such that we can attempt to close on any major issues
> identified before/during the meeting.  Nothing like a good deadline to move
> things forward.
> 
> Note that it is okay to expect a few minor issues to arise during review so
> don't think the I-Ds need to be perfect.  Essentially looking for a thumbs up
> that all work items are complete at this point.
> 
> If the I-Ds are not ready, are they ready enough for broader and closer 
> inspection at this point?

In our recent design meetings, we've been asking this same question.

>From my perspective, draft-ietf-nfsv4-federated-fs-protocol is ready 
for WG last call since there have been no unresolved questions about 
it in the past month. Implementations of this specification are well 
underway. At next week's Bake-a-thon, there will be at least two 
implementations of this specification undergoing testing.

At our conference call yesterday, a handful of small TODO items were 
identified in draft-ietf-nfsv4-federated-fs-admin. I'd suggest we 
address these items (I estimate the time needed will be about 1 week) 
before a WG last call on this document. Implementations of this 
specification are also underway.

My suggestion would be to start a WG last call on 
draft-ietf-nfsv4-federated-fs-protocol, during which the updates to 
draft-ietf-nfsv4-federated-fs-admin will be made. At the completion of 
the WG last call on draft-ietf-nfsv4-federated-fs-protocol, WG last 
call could begin on draft-ietf-nfsv4-federated-fs-admin. If reviewers 
have enough bandwidth for a WG last call on both documents 
simultaneously, we could go that route instead.

-james

---

From: "Everhart, Craig" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 1 Oct 2010 10:54:27 -0400

> From: Lentini, James
> Sent: Friday, October 01, 2010 9:28 AM
> Subject: Re: [nfsv4] FedFS documents ready for WG last call?
> 
[...]
> simultaneously, we could go that route instead.

+1.

Footnote that I don't think the second last-call should wait for the
first to complete, assuming that fatal objections to the first haven't
yet arisen.

		Craig

---

From: Robert Thurlow <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 01 Oct 2010 09:10:57 -0600

James Lentini wrote:

> it in the past month.

> specification are also underway.

I agree with James.  We're closing on things, and I am thinking
that a last call is what we need to get the final nits out.
The admin draft is not as ready but it has had, IMO, the last
serious structural changes it is likely to need.

Rob T