Re: iSCSI: Last Call process

[Paul Koning <ni1d@arrl.net>]

Excerpt of message (sent 4 April 2002) by Black_David@emc.com:
> > > > Is there any consensus that iSCSI Last Call should wait for DH-CHAP
> > > > Last Call?
> > > 
> > > Yes.
> > 
> > OH REALLY?
> > 
> > I did not see a consensus call.  And I most assuredly did not see
> > consensus.
> > 
> > David, can we have a consensus call on this?
> 
> Not on that issue in particular, as it's entirely under the control
> of the WG chairs.  DH-CHAP requires serious consideration by the WG,
> and in turn the real WG Last Call for iSCSI will have to wait until
> after that consideration has occurred (e.g., there's no Internet-Draft
> yet). 

So are you saying that the WG has no say on this?  Why?

I'm pretty unhappy about this.  What I see is that, at the last
minute, a new protocol is introduced (DH-CHAP), and we're suddenly
being told that iSCSI has been made dependent on that new protocol.
Why isn't that a decision for the WG to make?  

What has changed in the past month that made DH-CHAP relevant?  For a
long time now, the iSCSI drafts have mentioned only SRP and (classic)
CHAP, with the former mandatory and the latter optional.  The IPR
issue has been resolved (for SRP), so that can't be the trigger.

Introducing new work and thereby risk delaying the iSCSI standard is
NOT a good thing to have happen at this time.  We need to get this
standard finished.

     paul