|
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] RE: R2TDataSNJulian, How do I know it is an R2T if the header digest failed? I am sorry if I am missing something very obvious here. Let us say that a header digest failed. What information in the header am I able to trust at this point? I don't know if it is an R2T or not. I don't know if the length is ok or not. Thanks, Somesh > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-ips@ece.cmu.edu [mailto:owner-ips@ece.cmu.edu]On Behalf Of > julian_satran@il.ibm.com > Sent: Tuesday, March 06, 2001 4:01 PM > To: ips@ece.cmu.edu > Subject: RE: R2TDataSN > > > > > Somesh, > > I am still lost. R2T is fixed length and you know that you have a bad > digest after reading it. > No length involved. ??? > > Julo > > "Somesh Gupta" <someshg@yahoo.com> on 07/03/2001 00:26:10 > > Please respond to someshg@yahoo.com > > To: Julian Satran/Haifa/IBM@IBMIL, ips@ece.cmu.edu > cc: > Subject: RE: R2TDataSN > > > > > Julian, > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: owner-ips@ece.cmu.edu [mailto:owner-ips@ece.cmu.edu]On Behalf Of > > julian_satran@il.ibm.com > > Sent: Tuesday, March 06, 2001 9:31 AM > > To: ips@ece.cmu.edu > > Subject: RE: R2TDataSN > > > > > > > > > > Somesh, > > > > You've lost me. I do not propose that you look at the bad R2tT but to > find > > that you have missed one > > by looking at the next. > > Since iSCSI PDUs define how long they are, you have to look at > one PDU to determine where the next PDU is. (unless ofcourse > the sync and steering layer is doing the work - see my exchange > with Venkat on that). > > On the long transfer etc., I was not sure what scenarios > an R2TDataSN was providing recovery from. Since you clarified > that it is to recover from a header digest error, we can > focus on that scenario. > > > This interesting for long transfers that have > > several outstanding R2Ts. > > What is speculative here? There was never a consensus that there > > will be no > > more than one outstanding R2T. > > > > Regards, > > Julo > > > > "Somesh Gupta" <someshg@yahoo.com> on 06/03/2001 17:23:04 > > > > Please respond to someshg@yahoo.com > > > > To: Julian Satran/Haifa/IBM@IBMIL, ips@ece.cmu.edu > > cc: > > Subject: RE: R2TDataSN > > > > > > > > > > I beg to disagree. If an R2T PDU (header) has bad digest, or any other > > header has a bad digest - since you always need the PDU length from > > the header, there is some uncertainty associated with further > processing. > > > > Are you proposing that the processing machine go into a "speculative" > > mode where the processing of the next PDU determines whether we were > > successfuly able to skip a bad PDU header? When there is a data digest > > error, further stream parsing is deterministic. But not when the PDU > > header digest error. > > > > Also the consensus (in my interpretation) was on applications > > not transfering very large amounts of data using a single command or > > read/write PDU. > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: owner-ips@ece.cmu.edu [mailto:owner-ips@ece.cmu.edu]On Behalf Of > > > julian_satran@il.ibm.com > > > Sent: Monday, March 05, 2001 5:41 PM > > > To: ips@ece.cmu.edu > > > Subject: Re: R2TDataSN > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Somesh, > > > > > > 1.The only consensus I heard is not to transfer a large amount of > > > data with > > > one PDU. > > > > > > 2.With DatasN and Sack we dont need any data in a bad header. > > > > > > 3. If an R2T is lost (received at initiator with bad digest) - the > > > initiator will know that from > > > the next R2T if the target has several outstanding - very likely at > long > > > distances - and will not have to way for a timeout. Other uses are > > > marginal. Basically it is "part of a command execution" and we can > > > painless recover > > > from failures for this case too. > > > > > > Regards, > > > Julo > > > > > > "Somesh Gupta" <someshg@yahoo.com> on 05/03/2001 20:40:06 > > > > > > Please respond to someshg@yahoo.com > > > > > > To: Julian Satran/Haifa/IBM@IBMIL, ips@ece.cmu.edu > > > cc: > > > Subject: R2TDataSN > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > R2TDataSN > > > > ---------- > > > > Sec 6.7.1 has some new content on how to handle lost R2Ts using > > > > SACKs. But I noticed that the SACK request (Sec 2.16) has not > > > > changed to indicate whether the DataSN is a R2T DataSN or just > > > > a Read PDU DataSN (D bit) > > > > So do we demux on the read/write operation type? > > > > And how does this affect PDU loss in bidirectional commands ? > > > > +++ SACK is ascking for data (DataSN) the target knows > > > > > > > > > > Julian, > > > > > > Regarding the R2TDataSN, I have a comments and a > > > question. > > > > > > I think that when a PDU header fails a CRC/checksum check etc, > > > it is a problem to depend on any information in the header (including > > > length fields), thereby making any further processing on > > > the connection unreliable. > > > > > > What scenarios do you envision where the R2TDataSN is useful. > > > IN Orlando I think there was clear consensus that application > > > do not try to transfer very large amounts of data using a > > > single command. > > > > > > Thanks, > > > Somesh > > > > > Thanks, > Somesh Gupta > > > _________________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com > > > _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
Home Last updated: Tue Sep 04 01:05:26 2001 6315 messages in chronological order |