|
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] iSCSI: draft04 questionsJulian, Thanks for incorporating a lot of the earlier reflector feedback into the latest draft. Some questions: 1. Section 1.2.5 states : "Unsolicited data MUST be sent on every connection in the same order in which commands were sent. If the amount of data exceeds the amount allowed for unsolicited write data, the specific connection MUST be stalled - i.e., no more unsolicited data will be sent on this connection until the specific command has finished sending all its data and has received a response." Sorry if there was a discussion on this already. Why not the iSCSI response of "Unsolicited data rejected" usable for this case? Initiator appears to be behaving erratically, and I don't see how it is expected to adhere to the stipulation that it shall not send anymore unsolicited data till this command is completed. 2. I didn't find a way for an iSCSI target to say that it does not support any unsolicited data at all. SPC-2 specifies that a zero FirstBurstSize means unlimited. 3. Section 2.14 states: "If an initiator intends to start recovery for a failing connection it MUST use the either the Logout command to "clean-up" the target end of a failing connection and enable recovery to start, or use the restart option of the Login command to the same effect." This seems to be contradicting section 2.10.1, where a prior logout of the CID is stated as a requirement for using the restart bit of the Login PDU (which I agree with). 4. Somehow, "Asynchronous Message" seems at odds with the rest of the usage in the draft in regards to PDUs (since a message is introduced as PDU in section 1.2). Should we may be just call it an AEN PDU? Section 2.14.3 calls this so. (I realize that it may not always result in a SCSI-level AER.) 5. In the same section 2.18, I dont' quite see the operational difference for an initiator, if any, between iSCSI event codes 2 & 3. Could you please comment? Also, isn't the time in seconds the maximum time than the minimum time as currently stated? 6. In section 2.20.1, reject reason code 5 is stated as a "command restart reject". Seems like the usage of "restart" in the draft elsewhere is for the connection/session login, and "retry" is for commands - except this one. Comment if I am reading too much into the usage. 7. Section 6.2 on digest errors states: "If the error is a Data-Digest-Error in a Data-PDU, the target MUST either request retransmission with a R2T or answer with a Reject iSCSI PDU and abort the task." Were you meaning the target's internal termination of the task? That could cause problems on a subsequent Data PDU reception from the initiator since there may be no state for the task in the target. Suggest dropping "and abort the task". 8. Same section states the following: "When an initiator receives an iSCSI data PDU with a Data-Digest error, it must discard the PDU and it MUST either request the missing data PDUs through SACK or terminate the command with an error." If you meant reporting a service failure to SCSI within the initiator, seems like that could cause trouble to initiator iSCSI layer since it is likely to receive the data/status PDUs for the command shortly thereafter. Suggest dropping "or terminate the command with an error", or replace with "or abort the task". 9. End of section 6.7.1 states: "An iSCSI target MAY reject a data-SACK and terminate the command with an iSCSI error response of SACK rejected." The "SACK rejected" iSCSI response code needs to be added in section 2.4.2. Thanks. -- Mallikarjun Mallikarjun Chadalapaka Networked Storage Architecture Network Storage Solutions Organization MS 5668 Hewlett-Packard, Roseville. cbm@rose.hp.com
Home Last updated: Tue Sep 04 01:05:28 2001 6315 messages in chronological order |