|
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] RE: iSCSI: statement on mandatory/optionalMallikarjun: I agree with your suggestion in concept, leaving it to those with the IETF experience to draw up the words, if yours don't work. Given the cross-over technology that this represents for engineers used to one style of standards wording, this kind of a paragraph would help with the interpretation issues. Good suggestion. Bob Robert Griswold Technologist Crossroads Systems, Inc. 512-928-7272 -----Original Message----- From: Mallikarjun C. [mailto:cbm@rose.hp.com] Sent: Thursday, June 07, 2001 1:44 PM To: ips@ece.cmu.edu Subject: iSCSI: statement on mandatory/optional Julian, I suggest the following explanatory text to be added to the iSCSI main draft (possibly as section 1.2.1). I really think this (in an abstract sense) helps readers to understand the optionality or otherwise of iSCSI features. Mandatory and optional features - All the features that are specified in this draft are mandatory to implement and mandatory to use, unless otherwise stated. - Features that are identified as "mandatory to implement but optional to use" (like the digests) MUST be implemented and MUST be honored by one side when the other side uses them (as in a PDU type), or wants to use them (as in negotiation). - Features that are identified as "optional to implement" (like the synch and steering layer) imply that implementations that support the features MUST interoperate with other implementations that do not support these features (i.e. implementations are guaranteed to be interoperable regardless of the feature support). Regards. -- 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 01:04:32 2001 6315 messages in chronological order |