|
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] RE: iSCSI padding should be 0Mike, you're not stepping on toes nor are you butting in. We need this kind of input because no one on this reflector knows everything. Thanks for your input. In this case, I feel that MUST is appropriate and that if someone wants take the time to check it then they are within their rights to do that. In fact, your test tools SHOULD check it if we say MUST. But, I don't think there would be a requirement for a target or initiator to check it ... just to do it. Eddy -----Original Message----- From: Fischer, Michael [mailto:Michael_Fischer@adaptec.com] Sent: Friday, July 27, 2001 1:21 PM To: 'eddy_quicksall@ivivity.com'; julian_satran@il.ibm.com Cc: 'ips@ece.cmu.edu' Subject: RE: iSCSI padding should be 0 Eddy, This discussion is purely based on semantics and the definition of the word. MUST indicates that it is REQUIRED. Yes? If it is REQUIRED that the padding be set to 0 and it is NOT then that implementation is in violation of the spec. Yes? You are correct that the RFC does not say that you must check it but it does imply it (or at least that it is checkable), which is what I stated. My concern is that Julian suggested that the spec say MUST be 0 and that he did NOT want people to check for 0. To insure that it is not checked, the statement MUST remain "SHOULD be 0." In the production environment, the checking of whether or not the padding has been set to zero may be bypassed for whatever reason, but in a testing environment (guess where I work. :) ), I am sure that if someone read the spec and implemented a test tool to verify that their implementation conforms to the spec they could generate a bug report if the padding was not 0. I am just trying to make sure that the spec is as unambiguous as possible and I apologize if I am stepping on any toes. Michael Fischer -----Original Message----- From: Eddy Quicksall [mailto:eddy_quicksall@ivivity.com] Sent: Friday, July 27, 2001 9:32 AM To: 'Fischer, Michael'; julian_satran@il.ibm.com Subject: RE: iSCSI padding should be 0 The RFC says: MUST This word, or the terms "REQUIRED" or "SHALL", mean that the definition is an absolute requirement of the specification. How does that say that I MUST check to be sure it has been done? Is that requirement someplace else? Eddy -----Original Message----- From: Fischer, Michael [mailto:Michael_Fischer@adaptec.com] Sent: Friday, July 27, 2001 12:26 PM To: 'Julian_Satran/Haifa/IBM%IBMIL'; eddy_quicksall@ivivity.com Cc: ips Subject: RE: iSCSI padding should be 0 Julian, I hate to butt in with this minor point, I think you guys are doing a great job in hammering out the specification and do not presume to know better. However, according to RFC2119 the word MUST indicates that it is a requirement of the specification and therefore implies that the receiver will need to check the value. If it MUST be zero and is not, then that would indicate a protocol error. Michael Fischer -----Original Message----- From: Julian_Satran/Haifa/IBM%IBMIL [mailto:julian_satran@il.ibm.com] Sent: Friday, July 27, 2001 8:46 AM To: eddy_quicksall@ivivity.com Cc: ips Subject: Re: iSCSI padding should be 0 Perhaps we should say MUST be sent as 0 and keep quiet about what the receiver should do (check for 0 - we don't want that). Thanks,Julo "Eddy Quicksall" <eddy_quicksall@ivivity.com> on 27-07-2001 18:18:33 Please respond to eddy_quicksall@ivivity.com To: Julian Satran/Haifa/IBM@IBMIL, ips@ece.cmu.edu cc: Subject: iSCSI padding should be 0 Julian, Section 2.1 says the padding should be 0. I guess that is correct because one may not use CRC and therefore may not want to set them to 0. Wouldn't it be better if section 2.1 was more specific and mentioned when they must be 0 if there is a CRC. Also, I noticed at the UNH plug fest that at least one person thought "should" meant "must". Therefore, I don't think it should say "should" ... I think it should not mention the 0'ness unless there is a CRC present. Also, transmission. Padding bytes, when presents in a segment covered by a CRC, have to be set to 0 and are included in the CRC. should say "when present in". Eddy_Quicksall@iVivity.com
Home Last updated: Tue Sep 04 01:04:10 2001 6315 messages in chronological order |