Skip to main content

Internet Small Computer System Interface (iSCSI) Corrections and Clarifications
draft-ietf-ips-iscsi-impl-guide-09

Yes

(Lars Eggert)
(Magnus Westerlund)

No Objection

(Chris Newman)
(Cullen Jennings)
(Dan Romascanu)
(Jari Arkko)
(Jon Peterson)
(Lisa Dusseault)
(Mark Townsley)
(Ron Bonica)
(Ross Callon)
(Sam Hartman)
(Tim Polk)

Note: This ballot was opened for revision 09 and is now closed.

Lars Eggert Former IESG member
Yes
Yes () Unknown

                            
Magnus Westerlund Former IESG member
Yes
Yes () Unknown

                            
Chris Newman Former IESG member
(was Discuss) No Objection
No Objection () Unknown

                            
Cullen Jennings Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection () Unknown

                            
Dan Romascanu Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection () Unknown

                            
Jari Arkko Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection () Unknown

                            
Jon Peterson Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection () Unknown

                            
Lisa Dusseault Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection () Unknown

                            
Mark Townsley Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection () Unknown

                            
Ron Bonica Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection () Unknown

                            
Ross Callon Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection () Unknown

                            
Russ Housley Former IESG member
(was Discuss) No Objection
No Objection (2007-06-06) Unknown
  From Gen-ART Review by From: Suresh Krishnan

  Summary: This draft is ready for publication, but I have some
  suggestions.

  Comments: Overall the draft is well written and has a really well
  written IANA Considerations section.

  Minor
  =====

  * Section 4.1.2 c

  "c. Should receive the TMF Response concluding all the tasks in
      the set of affected tasks. "

  I am not sure of the intent of the sentence, but I believe it to be
  normative. So I think the "Should" needs to be replaced with a SHOULD.

  * It is really unclear from the draft how to differentiate between
  the following types of information
    - Updates to RFC3720
    - New behavior on top of RFC3720
    - Clarifications and implementation advice
  since they are intermingled throughout the document.

  * For section 11.2 iSCSI Opcodes, the document mentions the following

    "Fields to record in the registry: Assigned value, Who can
    originate (Initiator or Target), Operation Name and its
    associated RFC reference"

  Since the op codes can also be assigned using the Expert Review
  process, it should probably mention that the RFC reference is 
  optional.

  Editorial
  =========

  * RFC2119 occurs twice in the references. Once as normative and once
  as informative
Sam Hartman Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection () Unknown

                            
Tim Polk Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection () Unknown