DA: Datamover Architecture for the Internet Small Computer System Interface (iSCSI)
RFC 5047

Note: This ballot was opened for revision 05 and is now closed.

Lars Eggert Yes

(Bill Fenner; former steering group member) No Objection

No Objection ()
No email
send info

(Brian Carpenter; former steering group member) No Objection

No Objection (2007-01-22)
No email
send info
draft-ietf-ips-iser-06.txt

(from Gen-ART review by Joel Halpern)

Nit: After the first occurrence of "RDMA-Capable Protocol" in the abstract, could you just put "(RCaP)"

Nit: I would include all the acronyms referenced in the definitions (SN, RCaP, ...) into the Acronym list.

Nit: I may have missed it, but I did not find a definitions (or description) of target and initiator before 2.4.  I presume that this is well-defined in other RDMA specs.  A paragraph here (or actual definitions in section 1) would be helpful.  (Yes, this can be understood once one gets to 2.5.  It is a matter of avoiding usage before description problems.)

(Cullen Jennings; former steering group member) No Objection

No Objection ()
No email
send info

(Dan Romascanu; former steering group member) No Objection

No Objection ()
No email
send info

(David Kessens; former steering group member) No Objection

No Objection ()
No email
send info

(Jari Arkko; former steering group member) No Objection

No Objection ()
No email
send info

(Jon Peterson; former steering group member) No Objection

No Objection ()
No email
send info

(Magnus Westerlund; former steering group member) No Objection

No Objection ()
No email
send info

(Ross Callon; former steering group member) No Objection

No Objection ()
No email
send info

(Russ Housley; former steering group member) No Objection

No Objection ()
No email
send info

(Sam Hartman; former steering group member) No Objection

No Objection (2007-01-21)
No email
send info
This is an excellent example of a concept that the IESG has been
discussing lately: how to separate a framework/architecture document
from a protocol specification to avoid normative references to
informational docs.  This was done well in this instance.

I could not find a use of the VERBS reference in the iser doc.  I was
trying to figure out if that reference was informational, but couldn't
find the citation.

(Ted Hardie; former steering group member) No Objection

No Objection (2007-01-22)
No email
send info
draft-ietf-ips-iwarp-da-05.txt says:

5.5  Transport Connection 

        The term "Transport Connection" is used in this document as a 
        generic term to represent the end-to-end logical connection 
        as defined by the underlying reliable transport protocol.  
        For this revision of this document, a Transport Connection 
        means only a TCP connection. 

I think the second sentence may be confusing when this reaches RFC status,
since those are not versioned.  I suggest replacing it with something like:

"For this document, all instances of Transport Connection refer to a TCP connection".