|
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] iSCSI : Further review feedback on latest iSCSI-02.txt draft.Julian/All, More feedback on the latest iSCSI draft (02.txt. dec 30, '00) : Section 1.2.2.3. Data PDU Numbering ============================ What is the scope of DataRNs ? Is this maintained per task or per connection or per session ? This should be explicitly stated in this section as is done in earlier sections for CmdRN and StatRN. Section 1.2.8.3. Max iSCSI PDU Size ============================ The login parameter for the Max iSCSI PDU Size as described in this section is missing in the Login/Text keys in Appendix C. Section 2.5. SCSI Task Management Command PDU ======================================= The "Logical Unit Number" field in the figure should state "Logical Unit Number or reserved (0)" since the LUN is a don't care value in case of the Target Reset task mgmt command. Section 2.6. SCSI Task Management Response ================================== The referenced Task Tag field can be removed since the "No Task Found" response error is not valid. (A Target should respond with an accept for an Abort Task request specifying an invalid Initator Task Tag). Section 2.7 READ SCSI Data PDU ========================== 1) The READ SCSI Data PDU does not contain a Target Task Tag. Hence, when initators acknowledge DataRNs using NOP-OUT, targets will have to lookup the I/O based on its Initator Task Tag. It would be simpler and more optimal for targets to have a single lookup mechanism based on their Target Task Tags. This would also be in sync with Fibre Channel semantics where target lookups are based on only RX_ID. This is possible if Target Task Tags are used for READ SCSI Data PDUs. Section 2.17 Asynchronous Event ========================= 1) "Target requests Logout on this connection" iSCSI event indicator. Why not just allow the target to originate a Logout as is done in Fibre Channel ? Besides, this AEN does not meet the requirement. How does the target convey the CID of the connection to be logged out ? I do not think SAM-2 lays any guidelines for how the SCSI interconnect protocol handle its native PDUs. (i.e. non-scsi operations). Fibre Channel allows unsolicited inbound traffic for ELS and BLS commands and allowing Logout and NOP-OUT (perhaps better thought of as a NOP command) commands to be originated by targets would be desirable and would get rid of this particular AEN iSCSI event indicator. Section 2.19. Reject PDU =================== What is the value-add from copying the received iSCSI header into the Reject PDU ? Returning the Initiator Task Tag alone in the Reject PDU allows the initiator to look up its per-task data structure to determine what iSCSI PDU was transmitted on the Initiator Task Tag. 2) Is the reject PDU intended to be used for both SCSI and non-SCSI PDUs ? The REJECT PDU should be used to reject ALL non-scsi PDUs. For scsi PDUs, sending a response back thru the standard response PDUs (SCSI response or SCSI Task Mgmt response) would be preferrable since this allows the communication of specific information related to the failure of the SCSI PDU in the respnse Data or Response Code fields of the SCSI Response or SCSI Task Mgmt Response. 3) More detailed Reason Code/Reason Explanation fields in the Reject PDU is highly desirable. This will greatly help enhance the interop abilities of initiators and targets by being able to isolate quickly the reasons for a PDU Reject. I will send in further comments to the reflector on desired reason code and reason explanations for the Reject PDU. Section 4.4. Format Errors ==================== Quoting from the draft : "When a session is active whenever an initiator receives an iSCSI PDU with a format error, for which it has an outstanding task, it MUST abort the target task and report the error as a SCSI check condition status with a sense key of 4h (hardware error)." Is the above referring to an initiator's action or a target's ? What is the reasoning behind this ? It seems to complicate Format Error Handling with no clear benefit. Is it the expectation that iSCSI initiators will fake a format error as a CHECK CONDITION back to the SCSI Layer ? If so, why ? And why the choice of "Hardware Error" ? Last, but not the least, the above statement is referring to all iSCSI PDUs and advocates that iSCSI initiators must fake a CHECK CONDITION back to the SCSI layer on any format error of any iSCSI PDU. This is not applicable for non-scsi iSCSI PDUs which have no SCSI context. I believe the REJECT PDU should only be used for non-scsi PDUs since Rejects to SCSI PDUs will need a different type of reason code/explanation information best fitted into the existing SCSI Response PDUs. Thanks, Santosh Rao begin:vcard n:Rao;Santosh tel;work:408-447-3751 x-mozilla-html:FALSE org:Hewlett Packard, Cupertino.;SISL adr:;;19420, Homestead Road, M\S 43LN, ;Cupertino.;CA.;95014.;USA. version:2.1 email;internet:santoshr@cup.hp.com title:Software Design Engineer x-mozilla-cpt:;21088 fn:Santosh Rao end:vcard
Home Last updated: Tue Sep 04 01:05:56 2001 6315 messages in chronological order |