RE: iSCSI: Alias consensus call

["Douglas Otis" <dotis@sanlight.net>]

David,

The human abstraction offered by an alias may be misleading and in some
cases could be best handled by a management scheme that better understands
user's perspectives and can provide clues within the name to its real
designation.  This places fewer burdens on future transports should the
alias feature be removed.  In the end, a management scheme should be more
friendly than an odd collection of labels.  Here less is more but not in
keeping with the all-in-one approach.

Doug

> Traffic on this topic has died down, so I believe that the
> rough consensus of the IPS WG is to retain support for Alias
> in the iSCSI protocol.
>
> I have seen two expressions of the opposite view:
> - Bob Snively's, which I am setting aside, as not
> 	being relevant to the topic - Bob's post
> 	concerned LU aliases rather than Initiator/
> 	Target aliases.
> - Marj Krueger's, which I take note of in making this
> 	call (i.e., the consensus call is over Marj's
> 	objection).
>
> Anyone other than Marj who wishes to object should post
> to the list.
>
> Thanks,
> --David
>
> ---------------------------------------------------
> David L. Black, Senior Technologist
> EMC Corporation, 42 South St., Hopkinton, MA  01748
> +1 (508) 435-1000 x75140     FAX: +1 (508) 497-8500
> black_david@emc.com       Mobile: +1 (978) 394-7754
> ---------------------------------------------------
>