Last Modified: 2004-09-28
|Done||Submit the initial protocol encapsulations as working group Internet-Drafts.|
|Done||Submit initial version of framework document as an Internet-Draft.|
|Done||Discuss drafts and issues at the IETF meeting in San Diego.|
|Done||Discuss framework, specification and related drafts (e.g., MIBs, discovery) for the protocol encapsulations at IETF meeting in Minneapolis.|
|Done||Submit final version of iSCSI requirements draft to the IESG for consideration as Informational RFC.|
|Done||Submit initial Internet-Draft of FCIP/iFCP common encapsulation format|
|Done||Begin revision of WG charter in consultation with the Area Directors.|
|Done||Meet at IETF meeting in London to discuss specification and related drafts (e.g., MIBs, discovery) for the protocol encapsulations|
|Done||WG Last Call on IPS security considerations document.|
|Done||WG Last Calls on iSCSI, iSCSI naming/discovery, and iSCSI MIB.|
|Done||WG Last Calls on all WG drafts intended to be published as RFCs, except NAA naming draft|
|Done||Submit remaining non-MIB protocol drafts intended to be published as RFCs to IESG, except NAA naming draft|
|Done||Revise iSCSI boot draft to address security issues and submit to IESG|
|Done||Determine whether to advance NAA naming draft for publication as an RFC in consultation with Technical Committee T10|
|Done||Submit draft on iSCSI ordering considerations for SCSI commands to IESG for consideration as Informational.|
|Feb 04||Submit all remaining MIB drafts to IESG.|
|Mar 04||Review with ADs what (if any) additional work the WG should undertake.|
|Done||Submit NAA naming draft to IESG for publication as an RFC|
|RFC3347||I||Small Computer Systems Interface protocol over the Internet (iSCSI) Requirements and Design Considerations|
|RFC3643||Standard||FC Frame Encapsulation|
|RFC3721||I||iSCSI Naming and Discovery|
|RFC3722||Standard||String Profile for iSCSI Names|
|RFC3723||Standard||Securing Block Storage Protocols over IP|
|RFC3783||I||SCSI Command Ordering Considerations with iSCSI|
|RFC3821||Standard||Fibre Channel Over TCP/IP (FCIP)|
|RFC3822||Standard||Finding FCIP Entities Using SLPv2|
IP Storage (ips) WG - Washington DC minutes
The IP Storage (ips) WG met 1300-1500 on Monday,
November 8, 2004 at the IETF meetings in Washington, DC.
AGENDA and MINUTES
Letters in square brackets (e.g., [A]) indicate first character in
filename of presentation.
Administrivia, agenda bashing, draft status review, etc.: [A] 15 min David Black, EMC (co-chair)
Milestones - iSER and DA to ADs in April/May 2005
Draft status - All protocol drafts are in RFC Editor queue - iSNS DHC option will be there shortly after meeting - FCIP SLP template needs an errata to correct version # in template from 0.1 to 1.0 - Waiting on new versions of iSCSI MIB, iSCSI Auth MIB and FCIP MIB from draft authors. - iFCP and iSNS MIBs need author attention
Any open MIB issues: [no slides] 15 min Elizabeth Rodriguez, Dot Hill (co-chair)
FC Management MIB (draft-ietf-ips-fcmgmt-mib-05.txt)
- New field to be added to deal with a MIB instance that covers multiple switches. This was submitted as an IETF Last Call comment, but got lost. -06 version of MIB will be produced containing all agreed-to changes from -05 plus this change. Message will be sent to list to do a quick review of this final change.
iSER and DA: [B] 1 hour Mike Ko, IBM
iSER = iSCSI Extensions for RDMA
DA = Datamover Architecture for iSCSI
Control of unexpected PDUs
- Sense of room: Using a key to limit # of outstanding unexpected PDUs is the right approach. "None" = "No Limit" is allowed. Minimum value (e.g., to avoid 1 or 2) is TBD [Open Issue]
- Specified default value (None vs. specific value) in absence of negotiation will be taken to list. [Open Issue]
- Draft will need to contain discussion of unexpected vs. expected PDUs and buffering requirements, and when an unexpected PDU ceases to be outstanding.
- Add cautionary notes to avoid NOP-out and NOP-in abuse, but take this to the list, as there may be a possibility of being able to specify initiator behavior that always works. [Open Issue]
- [Open Issue]'s to be discussed on list.
iSER over InfiniBand: [C] 30 min John Hufferd, IBM
No draft available. This time period is for discussion of possible work to support iSCSI over InfiniBand via iSER. The primary purpose of this time is a discussion of whether the IETF should undertake work in this area, and if so, what scope of work is appropriate (e.g., to avoid all of us having to become InfiniBand experts).
Proposal is iSER over InfiniBand to enable use of iSCSI
Terminology: RDMAP should be for the RDDP WG protocol only, and not generalized as proposed in the slides.
Resolution: No real conclusion. Enabling reuse of IETF technology like iSCSI/iSER in other environments is a "good thing" in principle. OTOH, our AD is concerned about InfiniBand protocols (e.g., RC) getting out onto the Internet and causing problems. Proponents should produce Internet-Draft addressing architecture, intended usage, Infiniband to IP/Internet proxy (in particular, protocol stack layer diagram) and proposed division of work between IETF and IBTA that avoids need for serious InfiniBand expertise in IETF (e.g., the work needed to cope with old implementations of InfiniBand appears to belong in IBTA, not IETF). Based on WG discussion of that draft, the WG co-chairs, and ADs can determine appropriate next steps.