A new working group has been formed in the Transport Services Area
of the IETF. For additional information, contact the Area Directors
or the WG Chairs.
IP Storage (ips)
----------------
Current Status: Active Working Group
Chair(s):
Steve Bellovin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
David Black <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Transport Area Director(s):
Scott Bradner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Allison Mankin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Transport Area Advisor:
Allison Mankin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Mailing Lists:
General Discussion:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To Subscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
In Body: subscribe ips
Archive: http://ips.pdl.cs.cmu.edu/mail/maillist.html
Description of Working Group:
There is significant interest in using IP-based networks to transport
block storage traffic. This group will pursue the pragmatic approach of
encapsulating existing protocols, such as SCSI and Fibre Channel, in an
IP-based transport or transports. The group will focus on the transport
or transports and related issues (e.g., security, naming, discovery, and
configuration), as opposed to modifying existing protocols. Standards
for the protocols to be encapsulated are controlled by other standards
organizations (e.g., T10 [SCSI] and T11 [Fibre Channel]). The WG cannot
assume that any changes it desires will be made in these standards, and
hence will pursue approaches that do not depend on such changes unless
they are unavoidable. In that case the WG will create a document to be
forwarded to the standards group responsible for the technology
explaining the issue and requesting the desired changes be considered.
The WG will endeavor to ensure high quality communications with these
standards organizations. The WG will consider whether a layered
architecture providing common transport, security, and/or other
functionality for its encapsulations is the best technical approach.
The protocols to be encapsulated expect a reliable transport, in that
failure to deliver data is considered to be a rare event for which
time-consuming recovery at higher levels is acceptable. This has
implications for both the choice of transport protocols and design of
the encapsulation(s). The WG's encapsulations may require quality of
service assurances (e.g., bounded latency) to operate successfully; the
WG will consider what assurances are appropriate and how to provide them
in shared traffic environments (e.g., the Internet) based on existing
IETF QoS mechanisms such as Differentiated Services.
Use of IP-based transports raises issues that do not occur in the
existing transports for the protocols to be encapsulated. The WG will
address at least the following:
- Congestion control suitable for shared traffic network environments
such as the Internet.
- Security measures, including authentication and privacy, sufficient
to defend against threats up to and including those that can be
expected on a public network.
- Naming and discovery mechanisms for the encapsulated protocols on
IP-based networks, including both discovery of resources (e.g.,
storage) for access by the discovering entity, and discovery for
management.
- Management, including appropriate MIB definition(s).
The WG will address security and congestion control as an integral part
of bits protocol encapsulation(s); naming, discovery, and management are
important related issues, but may be addressed in companion documents.
The WG specifications will provide support for bridges and gateways that
connect to existing implementations of the encapsulated protocols. The
WG will preserve the approaches to discovery, multi-pathing, booting,
and similar issues taken by the protocols it encapsulates to the extent
feasible.
It may be necessary for traffic utilizing the WG's encapsulations to
pass through Network Address Translators (NATs) and/or firewalls in some
circumstances; the WG will endeavor to design NAT- and firewall-friendly
protocols that do not dynamically select target ports or require
Application Level Gateways.
Effective implementations of some IP transports for the encapsulated
protocols are likely to require hardware acceleration; the WG will
consider issues concerning the effective implementation of its protocols
in hardware.
The standard internet checksum is weaker than the checksums used by=20
other implementations of the protocols to be encapsulated. The WG will
consider what levels of data integrity assurance are required and how
they should be achieved.
The WG will produce a framework document that provides an overview of
the environments in which its encapsulated protocols and related
protocols are expected to operate. The WG will produce requirements and
specification documents for each protocol encapsulation, and may produce
applicability statements. The requirements and specification documents
will consider both disk and tape devices, taking note of the variation
in scale from single drives to large disk arrays and tape libraries,
although the requirements and specifications need not encompass all such
devices.
The WG will not work on:
- Extensions to existing protocols such as SCSI and Fibre Channel beyond
those strictly necessary for the use of IP-based transports.
- Modifications to internet transport protocols or approaches requiring
transport protocol options that are not widely supported, although
the WG may recommend use of such options for block storage traffic.
- Support for environments in which significant data loss or data
corruption is acceptable.
- File system protocols.
Operational Structure:
Due to the scope of the task and the need for parallel progress on
multiple work items, the WG effort is organized as follows:
A technical coordinator will be identified and selected for each
protocol encapsulation adopted as a work item by the group. This person
will be responsible for coordinating the technical efforts of the group
with respect to that encapsulation, working with and motivating the
document editors, and evangelizing the group's work within both the
community and relevant external organizations such as T10 and T11.
In addition to the normal responsibilities of IETF working group chairs,
the IPS chairs hold primary responsibility for selection of
coordinators, identifying areas of technical commonality and building
cross-technology efforts within the group.
Coordinators for initially important encapsulations:
SCSI over IP (aka iSCSI): TBD
Fibre Channel (FC-2) over IP: TBD
Goals and Milestones:
Oct 00 the initial protocol encapsulations as working group
Internet-Drafts.
Nov 00 Submit initial version of framework document as an
Internet-Draft.
Dec 00 Discuss drafts and issues at the IETF meeting in San Diego.
Feb 01 Submit final versions of requirements drafts to the IESG for
consideration as Informational RFCs.
Mar 01 Discuss framework, specification and related drafts (e.g.,
MIBs, discovery) for the protocol encapsulations at IETF
meeting in Minneapolis.
May 01 Submit protocol specification drafts to the IESG for
consideration as Proposed Standard RFCs.
Jun 01 Begin revision of WG charter in consultation with the Area
Directors.
Aug 01 Meet at IETF meeting to close any open issues and finish any
outstanding work items, including MIB, discovery, and framework
drafts.
Sep 01 Submit MIB, discovery, framework, and any other WG drafts to
the IESG for consideration as appropriate to each draft.
