Subject: Re: [nfsv4] Fwd: I-D Action: draft-ietf-nfsv4-versioning-05.txt

From: Mike Kupfer <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 02 Sep 2016 12:15:50 -0700

David Noveck writes:

>> I appreciate that it's a lot shorter, thanks, it's much easier for me to
>> deal with than draft-ietf-nfsv4-versioning-05.
>
> I'm OK with basing -06 on draft-dnoveck-nfsv4-extension-00, with
> some changes based on your suggestions.
>
> Before I do that, I need to make sure the working group as whole is
> OK with this shift.  Let's suppose I'll submit a -06 soon after Labor Day.

I'm okay with it.

FWIW, I didn't see any major problems with
draft-dnoveck-nfsv4-extension-00 (i.e., no topics to take out, no topics
from draft-ietf-nfsv4-versioning-05 to add).  It'd be nice to capture
the documentation part of draft-ietf-nfsv4-versioning-05 in an
informational document (or Best Practices?).

I have several minor comments on draft-dnoveck-nfsv4-extension-00; we'll
see how many I can get written up before you publish
draft-ietf-nfsv4-versioning-06.

cheers,
mike

---

From: David Noveck <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 3 Sep 2016 16:45:03 -0400

> from draft-ietf-nfsv4-versioning-05 to add).

Given the positive response from you and Bruce and the absence of negative
comments on my plan, I'm going ahead with using this as the basis for
draft-ietf-nfsv4-versioning-06.

> It'd be nice to capture

I'd always planned to do that but my plans were always kind of vague.  It's
probably time to change that.

I guess I'll produce an I-D draft-dnoveck-nfsv4-versionmgt-00 around the
end of the year.  The intended status will probably be Informational.

We'll be playing Musical chairs with document titles:

versionmgt-00 will get the title:

*NFSv4 Version Management*

which is the also the title of versioning-05, but we will avoid a conflict
since the title of versioning-06 will be:

*Rules for NFSv4 Extensions and Minor Versions*

> draft-ietf-nfsv4-versioning-06.

No need to rush.  Anything not ready for -06 can go into -07.  In any case,
we will wait for WGLC on versioning until there is an extension (e. g.
umask, xattrs) ready for WGLC.

---

From: "J. Bruce Fields" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 5 Sep 2016 09:57:12 -0400

> umask, xattrs) ready for WGLC.

The umask draft is ready for last call as far as I'm concerned.

There was a suggestion to switch from (mode, umask) to
(mode-to-use-in-inherited-case, mode-to-use-in-uninherited-case), but
Andreas and I still prefer the former, and I don't *think* anyone cared
enough to press the point.

I have a few changes pending locally, but they're very minor (typos,
etc.).

--b.