Subject: Re: [nfsv4] Adjustomg milestones to address Benoit's comments

From: Spencer Dawkins at IETF <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2017 11:42:30 -0500

Dear NFSters,

On Sun, Sep 24, 2017 at 6:28 AM, David Noveck <[email-masked]> wrote:

> Benoit's comments could be read as suggesting two milestone's per
> document,  but I've continued to use the one-milestone-per-document
> framework suggested by David Black as more manageable and understandable.
> In shifting most milestones from WGLC to "submit final" I've added three
> months per milstone,assuming that the documents will have sufficient review
> before entering WGLC to avoid major issues arising at that time.  The one
> document that retains a WGLC milestone is one that may well never be
> published as an (informational) RFC, although the working group is free to
> decide otherwise:
>
> In any case, the following is a proposed replacement section.
>
> ========================================================================
> |   Date  |                Milestone                                   |
> |---------+------------------------------------------------------------|
> | 6/2018  | WGLC for draft-ietf-nfsv4-migration-issues (Informational) |
> |---------+------------------------------------------------------------|
> | 6/2018  | Submit final document describing use of NVMe in accessing  |
> |         | a pNFS SCSI Layout (as Proposed Standard)                  |
> | 11/2018 | Submit final document describing NFSv4.0 trunking          |
> |         | discovery (as Proposed Standard)                           |
> | 1Q2019  | Submit final document describing NFSv4.1 trunking          |
> |         | discovery (as Proposed Standard)                           |
> | 1Q2019  | Submit final document describing Transparent State         |
> |         | Migration in NFSv4.1 (as Proposed Standard)                |
> | 2Q2019  | Submit final document describing CM private data           |
> |         | convention for RPC-over-RDMA version 1 (Informational)     |
> | 3Q2019  | Submit final document describing pNFS RDMA Layout (as      |
> |         | Proposed Standard)                                         |
> | 4Q2019  | Submit final document defining RPC-over-RDMA Version 2     |
> |         | (as Proposed Standard).                                    |
> ========================================================================
>

I saw an "OK with me" from Spencer (S), and no objections, so I've approved
these in the datatracker.

---

From: Spencer Shepler <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2017 17:38:59 +0000

Thanks, Spencer D.

From: nfsv4 [mailto:[email-masked]] On Behalf Of Spencer Dawkins at IETF
Sent: Tuesday, October 10, 2017 9:43 AM
To: David Noveck <[email-masked]>
Cc: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [nfsv4] Adjustomg milestones to address Benoit's comments

Dear NFSters,

On Sun, Sep 24, 2017 at 6:28 AM, David Noveck <[email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]>> wrote:
Benoit's comments could be read as suggesting two milestone's per document,  but I've continued to use the one-milestone-per-document framework suggested by David Black as more manageable and understandable.  In shifting most milestones from WGLC to "submit final" I've added three months per milstone,assuming that the documents will have sufficient review before entering WGLC to avoid major issues arising at that time.  The one document that retains a WGLC milestone is one that may well never be published as an (informational) RFC, although the working group is free to decide otherwise:

I saw an "OK with me" from Spencer (S), and no objections, so I've approved these in the datatracker.