IETF
nfsv4
nfsv4@jabber.ietf.org
Thursday, 8 November 2012< ^ >
Room Configuration

GMT+0
[08:02:08] spencer.shepler joins the room
[08:02:22] <spencer.shepler> looking forward to the meeting....
[08:02:44] spencer.shepler leaves the room
[14:04:36] Martin joins the room
[14:05:46] Thomas Haynes joins the room
[14:05:53] Chuck Lever joins the room
[14:07:19] spencer.shepler joins the room
[14:07:29] <spencer.shepler> good morning everyone
[14:07:41] <Chuck Lever> can you hear us?
[14:07:48] <Martin> Good Morning Spencer!
[14:07:51] <spencer.shepler> yes, I can
[14:08:14] <spencer.shepler> this internet thing is going to catch on
[14:08:17] <spencer.shepler> :-)
[14:08:28] <Chuck Lever> martin shakes his head
[14:08:41] <Martin> I did :)
[14:11:22] <Thomas Haynes> Spencer!
[14:12:49] <spencer.shepler> good morning; all of the presentations are uploaded to the ietf site btw
[14:19:51] <spencer.shepler> what is the intent for that work?
[14:19:55] <spencer.shepler> the SMB FSLs?
[14:19:59] <spencer.shepler> standards track?
[14:20:15] <Thomas Haynes> Yes, but Thurlow needs to kickstart it
[14:20:42] <spencer.shepler> would you mind asking chuck? :-)
[14:21:29] <spencer.shepler> tom sounds just like me?
[14:21:38] <Thomas Haynes> Informational
[14:21:47] <spencer.shepler> great
[14:22:26] <spencer.shepler> oh, hey, Lars...
[14:22:29] Martin leaves the room: Replaced by new connection
[14:22:29] martin.stiemerling joins the room
[14:24:25] <Chuck Lever> beepy is struggling with his technology
[14:24:34] <spencer.shepler> bummer
[14:24:45] <spencer.shepler> I remember these plastic things that we used for presentations
[14:24:47] <spencer.shepler> :-)
[14:24:56] <spencer.shepler> wrote them out by hand
[14:25:04] <spencer.shepler> it was great
[14:25:04] <Chuck Lever> Sharpie-based
[14:25:32] <spencer.shepler> projector lightbulbs were the only problem you could have
[14:25:44] <spencer.shepler> keynote printing did it
[14:25:48] <spencer.shepler> blame tom
[14:28:11] <spencer.shepler> don't really want such a small document
[14:28:27] <spencer.shepler> really should ride with the minor versions for clarity
[14:28:34] <spencer.shepler> and timeliness of update
[14:29:22] <Chuck Lever> a small document might be much faster to update
[14:29:35] <spencer.shepler> yes, it could but which minor version do they apply to?
[14:29:43] <spencer.shepler> since we keep changing them....
[14:30:47] <spencer.shepler> yes, that is the change
[14:30:54] <spencer.shepler> 5661 was a mistake
[14:31:10] <spencer.shepler> keep the rules with the minor version so it is clear what they apply to...
[14:31:16] <spencer.shepler> sure, we can discuss on the mailing list
[14:31:26] <spencer.shepler> NO!
[14:31:40] <spencer.shepler> don't rev the 5661 document just for that
[14:32:12] <spencer.shepler> Thanks, Chuck!
[14:32:23] martin.stiemerling leaves the room: Replaced by new connection
[14:32:33] <spencer.shepler> wow, room must be full
[14:32:47] <spencer.shepler> and I heard a voice that I didn't recognize
[14:33:11] <spencer.shepler> that isn't what he meant to say
[14:33:21] <spencer.shepler> WRITE always allows for writing data :-)
[14:33:56] <spencer.shepler> When does he plan on holding design review meetings?
[14:34:09] <Chuck Lever> i imagine in the Thursday afternoon slot we used before
[14:34:19] <spencer.shepler> yes, need two week's notice
[14:34:30] <spencer.shepler> heh
[14:34:32] <spencer.shepler> he is funny
[14:34:37] <spencer.shepler> that is thanksgiving
[14:34:42] <Chuck Lever> moving to RPCSEC slides
[14:35:00] <spencer.shepler> :-)
[14:35:12] <spencer.shepler> you are great, chuck; thanks for the help
[14:35:28] <Chuck Lever> yw
[14:37:13] <spencer.shepler> YES!
[14:37:15] <Chuck Lever> *crickets*
[14:37:23] rscheff joins the room
[14:37:38] <spencer.shepler> either that or NFSv4.2 (as written) stops
[14:38:57] <spencer.shepler> yeah, andy!
[14:39:22] <Chuck Lever> Andy's coming next
[14:39:34] <Thomas Haynes> Whee!
[14:39:40] <spencer.shepler> I am singing filler music in my head
[14:39:48] <Thomas Haynes> Oh, Abba?
[14:39:48] <spencer.shepler> kind of like jeopardy music
[14:40:03] <Thomas Haynes> Dance with me, young and sweet, only 17
[14:44:58] beepy joins the room
[14:45:23] <beepy> On Spencer - corporate firewalls blocked me.
[14:46:05] <spencer.shepler> firewalls are cool
[14:46:43] <spencer.shepler> very cool
[14:46:45] <spencer.shepler> thanks andy
[14:51:51] <spencer.shepler> not sure the requirement to have the other protocols document is a stated requirement
[14:52:19] <Thomas Haynes> I think Lars is about to address that
[14:52:36] <spencer.shepler> need to work from what is in the 5661 definition
[14:52:40] <spencer.shepler> not what we would like :-)
[14:52:50] <Thomas Haynes> :->
[14:54:42] <Thomas Haynes> I thought Oracle owned Lustre?
[14:54:55] Chuck Lever makes a raspberry
[14:54:59] <spencer.shepler> no, it is a GPL implementation; forked
[14:55:11] <spencer.shepler> oh, sorry, sarcasm
[14:55:30] <Chuck Lever> that was Boaz Harrosh on the mic
[14:56:24] <spencer.shepler> btw: as written, 5661 doesn't say anything about the transport mechanism for a pNFS layout (the requirements for documentation)
[14:56:48] <Chuck Lever> hold that thought :-)
[14:57:21] <spencer.shepler> yeah, we don't need to bring that up at the moment
[14:57:21] <beepy> People can view jabber logs later? I may just say they should view comments later - no need to discuss now?
[14:57:34] <Thomas Haynes> Yes, they can see them
[14:57:46] <spencer.shepler> yes, no need to discuss that issue now
[14:58:13] <Thomas Haynes> http://www.ietf.org/jabber/logs/nfsv4/
[14:58:43] <beepy> Thanks!
[14:59:55] <Thomas Haynes> Boaz again
[15:00:49] <spencer.shepler> yes, I recognize that voice ...
[15:01:09] <spencer.shepler> ?
[15:01:19] <spencer.shepler> I am so confused some times ....
[15:01:41] <Thomas Haynes> :-S
[15:02:19] <beepy> Comments Spencer? Disposition moving forward?
[15:02:54] <spencer.shepler> He can move it forward as a personal draft
[15:03:23] <spencer.shepler> Needs more momentum overall
[15:04:08] <Chuck Lever> or interest in a second implementation
[15:04:37] <Thomas Haynes> Dosn't the FreeBSD client meet that?
[15:04:58] <Thomas Haynes> Never mind, he just axed that
[15:05:04] <spencer.shepler> we get hung up on second implementations; there are larger issues to be dealt with first
[15:05:13] <spencer.shepler> oh, nice siren in the background
[15:05:27] <spencer.shepler> "fancy words" :-)
[15:05:58] <Chuck Lever> i meant it feels like, in the room, that no-one else is interested
[15:06:13] <Thomas Haynes> Ack
[15:06:14] <Chuck Lever> maybe it's just me
[15:06:38] <spencer.shepler> personal draft and gaining interest if it is there; that is the natural progression
[15:06:43] <Chuck Lever> ok
[15:07:38] <Thomas Haynes> :->
[15:07:55] <spencer.shepler> wow, boaz escalated that quickly
[15:08:15] <spencer.shepler> ??
[15:08:27] <Thomas Haynes> Getting warmed up for Benny's presentation - lot of people here for that.
[15:08:44] <beepy> He may have a point - if he was referring to consistency/coherency between two "distributed" file systems? Was that what he touched on?
[15:08:53] <spencer.shepler> sounds like there are many people in the room
[15:09:10] <Chuck Lever> about 20
[15:09:12] <spencer.shepler> yes, he likely does have a point; just a quick escalation given the state of the draft
[15:09:20] <spencer.shepler> hey, great turnout, nice to hear
[15:09:35] <beepy> 19 of them are from NetApp:-)
[15:09:46] <Chuck Lever> heh
[15:09:55] <spencer.shepler> ouch
[15:10:01] <beepy> Or Ex-NetApp.
[15:10:06] <beepy> Just joking:-)
[15:10:27] <spencer.shepler> or ex-sun?
[15:10:29] <Thomas Haynes> Yeah, this is not our spec-fs meeting
[15:10:46] <Thomas Haynes> 4?
[15:10:54] <spencer.shepler> oh well
[15:14:50] <spencer.shepler> personal draft for the time being
[15:16:03] <beepy> yes. anyone confused?
[15:16:12] <spencer.shepler> nope; just repeating myself
[15:18:33] <spencer.shepler> the slides have been updated on the site
[15:18:40] <spencer.shepler> as well
[15:18:44] <spencer.shepler> with the latest from Benny
[15:19:39] <beepy> Are you missing any?
[15:21:44] <spencer.shepler> don't think so
[15:23:42] <beepy> thoughts?
[15:23:59] <spencer.shepler> none so far
[15:24:18] <beepy> A blank slate
[15:29:21] <beepy> I truly wish people would DRAW SOME DIAGRAMS of how these hybrid approaches would fit together
[15:29:46] <beepy> Cranky chair
[15:29:52] <spencer.shepler> pictures are good
[15:42:11] <beepy> Comments from the people in the loge seats?
[15:42:46] <spencer.shepler> we obviously need clarification about use of protocols that are not defined by the IETF
[15:43:04] <spencer.shepler> what are requirements for new pNFS layouts for both the client facing use and the server/server use
[15:43:32] <Chuck Lever> agree, Linux Box has been hitting that issue for a while
[15:49:49] <spencer.shepler> group needs to decide if there is interest in an update to the files based layout
[15:49:53] <spencer.shepler> if there is, requirements
[15:50:11] <spencer.shepler> then a separate I-D (standards track document) that captures the new definition
[15:50:51] <spencer.shepler> but the efforts don't need to be one document/layout
[15:52:42] <spencer.shepler> his proposal can continue on
[15:52:49] <spencer.shepler> he doesn't have to join any other's efforts
[15:53:07] <beepy> Next steps. Exactly?
[15:53:37] <spencer.shepler> Benny can decide if he wants to take on other requirements and changes from others
[15:53:50] <spencer.shepler> and if there is interest in a general update to the "files" layout, that can continue on as well
[15:54:14] <beepy> WHen? And impact on other already chartered work?
[15:54:22] <spencer.shepler> if there are competing proposals, let people document them and present at the next meeting or on the WG alias
[15:54:27] <spencer.shepler> I am not suggesting charter updates
[15:54:34] <Thomas Haynes> Right, sounds like NFSv4.3 is being ironed out
[15:54:44] <Thomas Haynes> :->
[15:54:45] <spencer.shepler> let us behave like other WGs; if people have ideas, then let them propose them and get momentum
[15:54:47] <spencer.shepler> or not
[15:55:10] <spencer.shepler> if people want something, then they need to put the effort in (writing it down) and working for feedback
[15:55:10] <Thomas Haynes> Agreed
[15:55:12] <spencer.shepler> it is work
[15:55:38] <spencer.shepler> "the WG" doesn't need to take on the work, the people in the room are the WG and they need to step up (just like Benny has with this document)
[15:55:50] <beepy> yes.
[15:55:57] <spencer.shepler> I don't agree with Boaz btw
[15:56:30] <Chuck Lever> maybe this should move to the mailing list
[15:57:07] <Chuck Lever> "this" meaning the technical discussion
[15:57:07] <Thomas Haynes> Ehh, we have 33 minutes
[15:57:20] <spencer.shepler> well, I am leaving in 5 minutes
[15:57:24] <beepy> Let me try to drive this to mail - couple people queued...
[15:57:31] <spencer.shepler> I have to take the kids to school
[15:57:48] <beepy> I'm going to tke these kids to the woodshed.
[15:57:53] <beepy> :-)
[15:59:26] <Thomas Haynes> Will there be lollipops?
[15:59:42] <Chuck Lever> balloons, cake, and unicorns
[15:59:55] <spencer.shepler> and I am not there to enjoy these things
[16:05:23] <beepy> candy corn
[16:05:50] <Thomas Haynes> That is not real candy!
[16:09:16] <spencer.shepler> thanks guys; heading off to school
[16:09:19] spencer.shepler leaves the room
[16:15:53] Chuck Lever leaves the room
[16:16:10] Thomas Haynes leaves the room
[16:29:24] beepy leaves the room
[16:33:02] rscheff leaves the room
[18:21:43] rscheff joins the room
[18:21:53] rscheff leaves the room
[18:40:45] Thomas Haynes joins the room
[18:43:09] Thomas Haynes leaves the room
[19:49:05] Thomas Haynes joins the room
[19:54:39] Thomas Haynes leaves the room
[22:11:25] Thomas Haynes joins the room
Powered by ejabberd Powered by Erlang Valid XHTML 1.0 Transitional Valid CSS!