Subject: [nfsv4] I-D Action: draft-ietf-nfsv4-versioning-06.txt

From: [email-masked]
Date: Wed, 07 Sep 2016 10:04:42 -0700

A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories.
This draft is a work item of the Network File System Version 4 of the IETF.

        Title           : Rules for NFSv4 Extensions and Minor Versions.
        Author          : David Noveck
	Filename        : draft-ietf-nfsv4-versioning-06.txt
	Pages           : 22
	Date            : 2016-09-07

Abstract:
   This document describes the rules relating to the extension of the
   NFSv4 family of protocols.  It covers the creation of minor versions,
   the addition of optional features to existing minor versions, and the
   correction of flaws in features already published as Proposed
   Standards.  The rules relating to the construction of minor versions
   and the interaction of minor version implementations that appear in
   this document supersede the minor versioning rules in RFC5661.

The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-nfsv4-versioning/

There's also a htmlized version available at:
https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-nfsv4-versioning-06

A diff from the previous version is available at:
https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-nfsv4-versioning-06

Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission
until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org.

Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at:
ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/

---

From: David Noveck <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 7 Sep 2016 13:28:57 -0400

This is the new shorter document based on the approach taken in
draft-dnoveck-nfsv4-extension-00.  As I indicated to Mike Kupfer, a lot of
the material removed will eventually make its way into an informational I-D.

I'll be waiting a while for Mike comments before submitting a -07.  If
anyone else is anticipating sending further comments, please let me know
and I'll hold up a bit before submitting -07, to allow me to incorporate
those.

My current intention is to ask for WGLC based on -07.  Bruce has indicated
that he thinks umask is ready for WGLC although he has not actually
requested it.

Although there is a general intention that this document go forward in
co-ordination with (at least) one of the  pending extensions, I don't think
there is any reason to tightly synchronize these and feel OK with umask
going forward soon as Bruce and Andreas feel they are ready.

The same holds for xattrs, if Marc and Manoj want to  proceed in the
near-future.  Btw, xattrs-02 is close to expiration, so a quick resubmit
may be necessary.

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, Sep 7, 2016 at 1:04 PM
Subject: [nfsv4] I-D Action: draft-ietf-nfsv4-versioning-06.txt
To: [email-masked]
Cc: [email-masked]

A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts
directories.
This draft is a work item of the Network File System Version 4 of the IETF.

Abstract:

_______________________________________________
nfsv4 mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nfsv4

---

From: [email-masked] (J. Bruce Fields)
Date: Wed, 7 Sep 2016 13:33:27 -0400

> that he thinks umask is ready for WGLC although he has not actually

Is there something I need to do?  If I literally just need to request it
on this list, consider it requested....

--b.

---

From: Manoj Naik <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 7 Sep 2016 17:36:28 +0000

On 9/7/16, 10:33 AM, "nfsv4 on behalf of J. Bruce Fields" <[email-masked] on behalf of [email-masked]> wrote:

    
    --b.
    
    > near-future.  Btw, xattrs-02 is close to expiration, so a quick resubmit

Consider this as a similar request for the xattr draft. I’ll have an update soon.

Manoj.

---

From: "Marc Eshel" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 7 Sep 2016 10:36:26 -0700

We are working on updating the document with all review comments, a new 
version will be ready soon.
Marc.

From:   David Noveck <[email-masked]>
To:     "[email-masked]" <[email-masked]>
Cc:     Mike Kupfer <[email-masked]>, "J. Bruce Fields" 
<[email-masked]>, [email-masked], Marc Eshel/Almaden/IBM@IBMUS, 
[email-masked]
Date:   09/07/2016 10:29 AM
Subject:        Fwd: [nfsv4] I-D Action: 
draft-ietf-nfsv4-versioning-06.txt

This is the new shorter document based on the approach taken in 
draft-dnoveck-nfsv4-extension-00.  As I indicated to Mike Kupfer, a lot of 
the material removed will eventually make its way into an informational 
I-D.

Although there is a general intention that this document go forward in 
co-ordination with (at least) one of the  pending extensions, I don't 
think there is any reason to tightly synchronize these and feel OK with 
umask going forward soon as Bruce and Andreas feel they are ready.

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, Sep 7, 2016 at 1:04 PM
Subject: [nfsv4] I-D Action: draft-ietf-nfsv4-versioning-06.txt
To: [email-masked]
Cc: [email-masked]

A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts 
directories.
This draft is a work item of the Network File System Version 4 of the 
IETF.

Abstract:

Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of 
submission
until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org.

---

From: "J. Bruce Fields" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 12 Sep 2016 10:01:43 -0400

> on this list, consider it requested....

Maybe Spencer's the one to ask, adding to cc.

--b.

---

From: Spencer Shepler <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 12 Sep 2016 15:35:34 +0000

I-D author should ask for it to go to last call  And it appears that this is ready.

Any other comments from WG on readiness?

-----Original Message-----
From: J. Bruce Fields [mailto:[email-masked]] 
Sent: Monday, September 12, 2016 7:02 AM
To: David Noveck <[email-masked]>
Cc: [email-masked]; J. Bruce Fields <[email-masked]>; Spencer Shepler <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [nfsv4] Fwd: I-D Action: draft-ietf-nfsv4-versioning-06.txt

On Wed, Sep 07, 2016 at 01:33:27PM -0400, bfields wrote:
> > draft-dnoveck-nfsv4-extension-00.  As I indicated to Mike Kupfer, a 
> > lot of the material removed will eventually make its way into an informational I-D.
> > 
> > I'll be waiting a while for Mike comments before submitting a -07.  
> > If anyone else is anticipating sending further comments, please let 
> > me know and I'll hold up a bit before submitting -07, to allow me to 
> > incorporate those.
> > 
> > My current intention is to ask for WGLC based on -07.  Bruce has 
> > indicated that he thinks umask is ready for WGLC although he has not 
> > actually requested it.
> 
> Is there something I need to do?  If I literally just need to request 
> it on this list, consider it requested....

--b.

> 
> --b.
> 
> > 
> > Although there is a general intention that this document go forward 
> > in co-ordination with (at least) one of the  pending extensions, I 
> > don't think there is any reason to tightly synchronize these and 
> > feel OK with umask going forward soon as Bruce and Andreas feel they are ready.
> > 
> > near-future.  Btw, xattrs-02 is close to expiration, so a quick 
> > resubmit may be necessary.
> > 
> > 
> > https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3a%2f%2fdat
> > atracker.ietf.org%2fdoc%2fdraft-ietf-nfsv4-versioning%2f&data=02%7c0
> > 1%7csshepler%40microsoft.com%7cc03d080f911f4087a9d708d3db1553c7%7c72
> > f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7c1%7c0%7c636092857051199849&sdata=Nc
> > XjJOf6pxoQv%2fPC%2fzOWZssQyBmDtbTxTkSXozpQ66w%3d
> > 
> > https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3a%2f%2ftoo
> > ls.ietf.org%2fhtml%2fdraft-ietf-nfsv4-versioning-06&data=02%7c01%7cs
> > shepler%40microsoft.com%7cc03d080f911f4087a9d708d3db1553c7%7c72f988b
> > f86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7c1%7c0%7c636092857051209857&sdata=0xeCzBk
> > 7pWmS7I5HMVnich3Vs0qF%2bdcXO1f76BTVBnY%3d
> > 
> > https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3a%2f%2fwww
> > .ietf.org%2frfcdiff%3furl2%3ddraft-ietf-nfsv4-versioning-06&data=02%
> > 7c01%7csshepler%40microsoft.com%7cc03d080f911f4087a9d708d3db1553c7%7
> > c72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7c1%7c0%7c636092857051209857&sdata
> > =pDTiihIcJwQ6GxDUFAneOLwf8waxaQ4wpZKzwCe6Yqg%3d
> > 
> > 
> > submission until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org.
> > 
> > https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3a%2f%2fwww
> > .ietf.org%2fmailman%2flistinfo%2fnfsv4&data=02%7c01%7csshepler%40mic
> > rosoft.com%7cc03d080f911f4087a9d708d3db1553c7%7c72f988bf86f141af91ab
> > 2d7cd011db47%7c1%7c0%7c636092857051209857&sdata=8BOvcALLKJcSo1bhpj6i
> > A3H4wC42zJWy3Z3zRm%2bNk0k%3d
> 
> > https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3a%2f%2fwww
> > .ietf.org%2fmailman%2flistinfo%2fnfsv4&data=02%7c01%7csshepler%40mic
> > rosoft.com%7cc03d080f911f4087a9d708d3db1553c7%7c72f988bf86f141af91ab
> > 2d7cd011db47%7c1%7c0%7c636092857051209857&sdata=8BOvcALLKJcSo1bhpj6i
> > A3H4wC42zJWy3Z3zRm%2bNk0k%3d
>

---

From: "J. Bruce Fields" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 12 Sep 2016 11:51:35 -0400

> I-D author should ask for it to go to last call  And it appears that this is ready.

I believe so.  Also, I forgot to cc Andreas, added.

--b.

---

From: "J. Bruce Fields" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2016 13:53:12 -0400

> I believe so.  Also, I forgot to cc Andreas, added.

What happened to this?  Could we get a last call?

--b.