SORT BY:

LIST ORDER
THREAD
AUTHOR
SUBJECT


SEARCH

IPS HOME


    [Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

    Re: iSCSI-related conclusions from Orlando interim Meeting



    
    
    I support this.
    
    Julo
    
    "Jim Hafner" <hafner@almaden.ibm.com> on 23/01/2001 00:08:29
    
    Please respond to "Jim Hafner" <hafner@almaden.ibm.com>
    
    To:   ips@ece.cmu.edu
    cc:
    Subject:  Re: iSCSI-related conclusions from Orlando interim Meeting
    
    
    
    
    
    Mark and David,
    
    Though we haven't discussed this within NDT, this issue is a bit broader
    (applicable to all key:value pairs in login and text messages).
    
    Some have suggested full C syntax, others have said that hex is sufficient.
    
    I'd like to support the two most important cases:
    1) representation of 'integer' type values with represent a quantity (like
    length, size, count, etc.)
    2) binary strings (as might occur in WWUIs, or other binary entities that
    don't necessarily represent a 'quantity'
    
    For the first, decimal seems the most natural.  For the latter, hex seems
    best suited.    For WWUI's, we've already weakly proposed a format that
    implies hex.  Perhaps in other cases, the prefix '0x' or the prefix 'hex='
    would be a good way to indicate non-decimal format.
    
    Jim Hafner
    
    
    Mark Bakke <mbakke@cisco.com>@ece.cmu.edu on 01-22-2001 06:16:55 AM
    
    Sent by:  owner-ips@ece.cmu.edu
    
    
    To:   David Robinson <David.Robinson@EBay.Sun.COM>
    cc:   ips@ece.cmu.edu
    Subject:  Re: iSCSI-related conclusions from Orlando interim Meeting
    
    
    
    That's right.  The N&D team will send a new draft soon with the
    encodings.  Some of the options for encoding binary data are hex,
    decimal, octal, and uuencode.  We will probably suggest hex; it
    uses more space than unicode, but for most binary names, is the
    simplest and most readable.  Please stay tuned.
    
    David Robinson wrote:
    >
    > Black_David@emc.com wrote:
    > > It's a bit cryptic.  The conclusion in the room was
    > > to convert binary values to/from text representations
    > > for the purpose of negotiation (and use UTF-8 for the
    > > text).  This was felt to be simpler than defining new
    > > formats for binary values.
    >
    > So if I want to send the binary data 0101101011110000
    > I first turn that into text "5AF0" then encode that into
    > UTF-8 "5AF0" (printable ASCII is a no-op in UTF-8)?
    >
    > I'll buy that.
    >
    > Any statement as to the text encoding? Hex? Decimal? Octal?
    >
    >         -David
    
    --
    Mark A. Bakke
    Cisco Systems
    mbakke@cisco.com
    763.398.1054
    
    
    
    
    
    
    


Home

Last updated: Tue Sep 04 01:05:46 2001
6315 messages in chronological order