RE: iSCSI:SRP

[Black_David@emc.com]

> As I also stated in the plenary, using "open source community likes it" is
> not an "official IETF criteria" for making technical decisions (at least I
> can not get anyone to write it down anywhere).

The following paragraph from Section 6.4.5 of RFC 3160 comes close:

   The IETF's methods for dealing with patents in standards are a
   subject of much debate.  You can read about the official rules in BCP
   9, but you should assume that the application of those rules is
   flexible and depends on the type of patent, the patent holder, and
   the availability of alternate technologies that are not encumbered by
   patents.

I would call particular attention to the last two lines ... Howard is
correct that suitability for open source implementation is not an
"official IETF criteria", but it is a factor that influences the process.

> The IP language in RFC 2026
> provides the official framework for dealing with IP issues.  Best as I can
> tell, we have met all of the RFC 2026 criteria regarding use of SRP.

That is correct, but it is not the entire story.  The IESG has the
authority and responsibility to review specifications for technical
quality, per RFC 2026, Section 6.1.2:

6.1.2  IESG Review and Approval

   The IESG shall determine whether or not a specification submitted to
   it according to section 6.1.1 satisfies the applicable criteria for
   the recommended action (see sections 4.1 and 4.2), and shall in
   addition determine whether or not the technical quality and clarity
   of the specification is consistent with that expected for the
   maturity level to which the specification is recommended.

The instructions to consider DH-CHAP fall under this authority.  We can
consider DH-CHAP now, or wait for the IESG to review iSCSI and discover
that we didn't consider DH-CHAP at which point it will be returned
to the WG with instructions to consider it - of these two, I would hope
that folks would prefer the "consider it now" alternative ...

... as I've said a number of times before, I think the third alternative
of starting a process fight with the IESG over this issue does not strike
me as a particularly wise course of action.

Thanks,
--David
---------------------------------------------------
David L. Black, Senior Technologist
EMC Corporation, 42 South St., Hopkinton, MA  01748
+1 (508) 249-6449 *NEW*      FAX: +1 (508) 497-8500
black_david@emc.com         Cell: +1 (978) 394-7754
---------------------------------------------------