20220726-nfsv4 The session is:
Tuesday, July 26th, 15:00 - 17:00 in Independence C Who           Time  Subject  Detail
Chair.        10m.  Misc     Introduction, note-well, agenda bashing, etc Tom taking notes.
Beepy driving slides. BIS document will be discussed on the mailing list. Zahed wants more time for the last discussion. Christoph
Hellwig       15m. Layout.    Using the Parallel NFS (pNFS) SCSI Layout with NVMe David Black, Chuck Lever and Christoph Hellwig updated from prior doc. Addressed poor normative reference. Ready for WG adoption. Open issues are 1) whether to add NVMe-specific device identifiers or just map to existing SCSI identifiers and 2) whether to add UUID support (for both NVMe and SCSI). Both additions would require protocol changes. Chuck Lever proposes moving to WG and out of information. Get done with no change to the over-the-wire protocols - David Black. Richard S wants it on standards track. Chuck
Lever         20m. Security.  RPC-with-TLS Two blockers (normatively referenced RFCs not yet published) cleared. Kitten RFC (remaining blocker - just published as RFC 9266). Mocked up on github. 88 weeks in editor queue. Two interoperability sessions run with four implementations (see slides). Chuck
Lever         20m  RDMA.     RPC-over-RDMA No major changes since last presentation. Major concern is lack of security in the protocol. David Black wonders what is practical to implement. Tom Talpey and David Black think QUIC would be straightforward - suggest avoiding TLS for RDMA. Richard S wants a security standard protocol. Christoph believes security and performance can co-exist. Perhaps a new WG to explore extensions to both NFS and RDMA? Chuck believes urgency of v2 is less than it used to be. Should we let this work expire? Tom Talpey agrees to let the document sit as a reference. Tom 
Haynes       10m  Open.      Issues found with Open and Delegation No objection to moving document into Last Call and assigning a document shepherd. 
Tom Talpey asked is there is more interest in (server) implementations - but no objection. Tom
Haynes.       15m. Layout.    How can clients recover open files when there are outstanding errors? Perhaps make this a convention. Tom to frame the question and proposal to WG alias in next two weeks. All           20m WG          What is the Roadmap of the WG? What are the priorities, the resources available? - Brian Focus on smaller documents over the larger work (the BIS). - David Black, Brian, others How are errata being addressed? – Zahed Are the BIS taking care of the errata? Brian: We just gotta scrub the errata list. 
Which errata do we not care about anymore? Richard wants us to take the RFC5661BIS document into the WG. Chuck points out this is difficult as the document has been split into multiple documents. Zahed questions whether we had an adoption call for the BIS document? David Black asks whether we should continue the split work on the BIS? Tom Talpey asks if the Charter is up to date?