RE: iSCSI: Reliability of markers (was Re: R2TDataSN and other recovery mechanisms)

["KRUEGER,MARJORIE (HP-Roseville,ex1)" <marjorie_krueger@hp.com>]

Venkat,

> > Consider the marker mechanism as an example. If the marker
> > falls within the TCP byte stream region which contains the
> > header, and the header digest fails, then do you trust this
> > marker or skip to the next marker. Or do we need a sum on the
> > marker itself.
> 
> You point out one of the disadvantages of the current marker
> approach.

Not sure what you mean "current marker approach"?  The appendix in iSCSI
05.txt lists two approaches, clearly the second marker approach (fixed
intervals) doesn't suffer from this disadvantage.  In any case, a marker
scheme would be roughly between the iSCSI layer and the TCP layer, so it's
not appropriate to include in the iSCSI header digest.

Marjorie Krueger
Networked Storage Architecture
Networked Storage Solutions Org.
Hewlett-Packard
tel: +1 916 785 2656
fax: +1 916 785 0391
email: marjorie_krueger@hp.com