|
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: iSCSI : draft contradicts itself in sections 1.2.5 & 5.5julian_satran@il.ibm.com wrote: > SHOULD NOT means NOT unless you have a good reason not too. And with a > digest error you have a good reason to - don't you? Not if you consider all the problems raised regarding this "discard and retry" policy on digest errors. See : http://ips.pdl.cs.cmu.edu/mail/msg03110.html - Santosh > > Santosh Rao <santoshr@cup.hp.com> on 25/01/2001 00:18:11 > > Please respond to Santosh Rao <santoshr@cup.hp.com> > > To: IPS Reflector <ips@ece.cmu.edu> > cc: > Subject: iSCSI : draft contradicts itself in sections 1.2.5 & 5.5 > > Julian, > > In Section 1.2.5, the draft states that : > "A target SHOULD NOT silently discard data and request re-transmission > through R2T." > > In Section 5.5 the draft encourages the above to be performed by stating > : > "When a target receives an iSCSI Data PDU with a data payload digest > error, it MUST discard it and request retransmission with a R2T." > > What is the intent of the former statement in Section 1.2.5, when digest > error recovery requires just the opposite ? > > Regards, > Santosh > > - santoshr.vcf 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 01:05:44 2001 6315 messages in chronological order |