|
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] RE: iSCSI virtualization proposalDon, This goes to the issue of bootstrapping. The discovery process should be extraction of information from an LDAP server. Doug > > How would discovery work in this scenario? > (What would who "find"?) > > Don Deel > don@prisa.com > > > -----Original Message----- > Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2000 11:54:12 +0200 > From: Yaron Klein <klein@eng.tau.ac.il> > Organization: Tel-Aviv University > To: ips@ece.cmu.edu > Subject: iSCSI virtualization proposal > > Proposal for iSCSI virtualization: > > The problem: > > In order to implement iSCSI virtualization in a local network, we > need the following topology: > > ----------- > | | > | host | > | | > ----------- > | > | > | > --------------------------------------------------------- > | | | | > | | | | > | | | | > ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- > | | | | | | | | > | Manager| | Disk A | | Disk B | | Disk C | > | | | | | | | | > ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- > > When the host is an iSCSI initiator, the disks are iSCSI targets > and the manager is with iSCSI target port to the host and iSCSI > initiator port to the disks. > > The host considers the manager as a “flat” disk space with iSCSI > port and is unaware of the disks. The manager manages the disks > in some algorithm to construct a combined virtual volume. > > Consider the following example: > > Each disk contains 1000 blocks. The virtual volume is thus 3000 > blocks. The hosts sends an iSCSI command to the manager to read > 40 blocks from address 500. The physical addresses are: A – > 400:409, B – 300:319 and C – 600:609. > > In the current iSCSI protocol, the traffic scenario is: > > Host -> manager: iSCSI command, read from 500 size 40. > Manager -> A: iSCSI command, read from 400 size 10. > A -> manager: iSCSI data. > A -> manager: iSCSI status. > Manager -> host: iSCSI data. > Manager -> B: iSCSI command, read from 300 size 20. > B -> manager: iSCSI data. > B -> manager: iSCSI status. > Manager -> host: iSCSI data. > Manager -> C: iSCSI command, read from 600 size 10. > C -> manager: iSCSI data. > C -> manager: iSCSI status. > Manager -> host: iSCSI data. > Manager -> host: iSCSI status. > > Problem 1: Traffic on the line is double! Each data packet is > transferred twice (from disk to manager and from manager to host). > > Problem 2: The manager is a bottleneck. Both data and commands of > all the system (assuming many hosts and disks) is transferred via it. > > Solution: > > Lets add in the iSCSI status message, in the “iSCSI status” > field, the following option: > > 2 - iSCSI reflection > > Which means that the status contains add-ons of iSCSI command > that the host should implement. These commands will implement the > original request. In our example it will look as: > > Host -> manager: iSCSI command, read from 500 size 40. > Manager -> host: iSCSI status (with reflection), iSCSI commands > (for A, B and C) > host -> A: iSCSI command, read from 400 size 10. > A -> host: iSCSI data. > A -> host: iSCSI status. > host -> B: iSCSI command, read from 300 size 20. > B -> host: iSCSI data. > B -> host: iSCSI status. > host -> C: iSCSI command, read from 600 size 10. > C -> host: iSCSI data. > C -> host: iSCSI status. > > Benefits: > > * Data traffic on the line is single. > * No bottleneck on the manager. > > Note: The manager is a software pack. It can be an independent > unit, in the host or in one of the disk. It is just schematically > stated as independent unit. > > In conclusion, the addition of the reflection feature in the > protocol is minor change, can be optional and will enable the > enormous potential of virtualization. > > Comments are more than welcome, > > Yaron Klein > SANRAD > > klein@sanrad.com >
Home Last updated: Tue Sep 04 01:06:41 2001 6315 messages in chronological order |