SORT BY:

LIST ORDER
THREAD
AUTHOR
SUBJECT


SEARCH

IPS HOME


    [Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

    FCIP: Minutes of 10/17 FCIP Authors teleconference


    • To: "IPS Mailing List (E-mail)" <ips@ece.cmu.edu>
    • Subject: FCIP: Minutes of 10/17 FCIP Authors teleconference
    • From: "Elizabeth Rodriguez" <egrodriguez@lucent.com>
    • Date: Wed, 24 Oct 2001 13:38:25 -0400
    • Content-Class: urn:content-classes:message
    • Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
    • Content-Type: text/plain;charset="iso-8859-1"
    • Sender: owner-ips@ece.cmu.edu
    • Thread-Index: AcFXZMou3eR4y3POTIeDevOcClckmgFTL/Lg
    • Thread-Topic: Minutes of 10/17 FCIP Authors teleconference

    Minutes from last week's FCIP author's call.
    
    Elizabeth
    
    -----Original Message-----
    
    Minutes of FCIP Authors teleconference
    10/17/01
    
    1. Security
    	Bob raised the issue that compliance requirements are made in
    both
    the FCIP draft
    	as well as the security framework draft, although the security
    draft
    is intended to
    	be an informational RFC. Not clear what happens if the two start
    to
    get out of sync.
    	In addition, requirements on the same function in different
    drafts
    is not desirable. Is it
    	even legal to put compliance requirements (MUST, etc) in a
    non-standards-track RFC?
    	Issue also applies to iSCSI and iFCP.
    
    	Bob to send note on issue to IPS reflector.
    
    2. NAPT
    	Solution documented by Ralph was discussed. Two issues were
    brought
    up:
    	how to address the ships-in-the-night behavior when two TCP
    connect
    requests
    	between 2 FCIP Entities cross each other, and how to make one
    end of
    the FCIP Link
    	aware of who is at the other hand in terms of its
    WWN+FCIP-identifier identity. Larry
    	suggested a bi-directional Short Frame exchange instead of the
    current proposed
    	unidirectional one, allowing each end to learn about the other,
    to
    solve the latter.
    	Anil believes this may help to address the ships-in-the-night
    problem.
    	Bob feels that this is better solved at a lower layer, and that
    bidirectional SF exchange
    	could introduce problems.
    
    	Larry as well as Bob to send out mail detailing the incremental
    changes and potential
    	issues, respectively.
    
    	Another area of discussion was the need for more than one FCIP
    Link
    between two
    	FCIP Entities. Some discussion around why this should be allowed
    for
    FCIP, just as it is
    	allowed for FC. Milan and Bob feel that there is a need to
    accomodate this behavior (while
    	also allowing a single link with multiple TCP connections).
    
    	Ralph to add front matter to clarify context of solution in the
    presence of NAPT gateways
    	in the next draft. Further discussion of solution and choices by
    email, final solution to be
    	agreed by next week.
    
    Attendees:
    Ralph Weber
    Jim Nelson
    Vi Chau
    Milan Merhar
    Anil Rijhsinghani
    Raj Bhagwat
    Dave Peterson
    Elizabeth Rodriguez
    Bob Snively
    Bill Creek
    Don Fraser
    Venkat Rangan
    Larry Lamers
    Andy Helland
    
    


Home

Last updated: Fri Nov 16 03:17:33 2001
7828 messages in chronological order