|
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] RE: iSCSI:Data Recovery from digest errors ...Deva, InitialR2T=no only implies that an *initial* unsolicited burst is allowed by the target - _not_ that R2T is completely disabled. For complete details, see rev07, Appendix D, item 24. Data sequence numbers always follow the rules clearly outlined in section 1.2.2.3. R2T is a request to transfer certain data range, *not* PDU sequence range (as does a SNACK). I hope that addresses your questions. -- Mallikarjun Mallikarjun Chadalapaka Networked Storage Architecture Network Storage Solutions Organization MS 5668 Hewlett-Packard, Roseville. cbm@rose.hp.com >Mallikarjun, > >Thanks for the input. I thought about it. I like the way of using R2T >to retry the data. But on further thoughts I have some >clarifications/concerns. > >At the outset, it looks to me to open the door for having the >target solicit for data (unless some restrictions are on the R2T) even >though R2T is disabled as initR2T is disabled.. But R2T PDU has all the >relevant field > data offset, data length etc and fits in to retry data. Now, If out of 64K >received, >target desires to choose to retry the 16K,say between 32K to 48K, what will >be the data >sequence numbers generated for the data PDUs sent as response to R2T. Will >it be the >same sequence number for Data PDUs when they were sent as unsolicited burst >or a different >one? What will be the value of the value of expR2TSN and expDataSN in the >SCSI response PDU for this case. Probably a flag in the R2T header indicate >that >it is a retry for immediate and the initiator should resend the entire >data.. > >If an initiator/target have to still be capable of supporting R2T when it is >disabled, >why would R2T and unsolicited data burst be mutually exclusive in the iSCSI >spec? Meaning, >if a command request is for 64K write and unsolicited burst size is 32K, why >not the target >receive the rest of the data (the next 32K) through R2Ts? > >Am I missing something? >Just my thoughts. what do you think? If Im on the wrong track, could you >correct me? > > > >Thanks > >Deva >Platys Communications > > > >-----Original Message----- >From: owner-ips@ece.cmu.edu [mailto:owner-ips@ece.cmu.edu]On Behalf Of >Mallikarjun C. >Sent: Tuesday, August 21, 2001 3:07 PM >To: deva@stargateip.com >Cc: ips@ece.cmu.edu >Subject: Re: iSCSI:Data Recovery from digest errors ... > > >Deva, > >Let me respond to your questions. > >Currently, the draft assumes that recovery R2Ts can be generated >for digest errors on unsolicited data bursts in separate data PDUs. >This will be explicitly called out as I said in a response to Sandeep: > >http://www.pdl.cmu.edu/mailinglists/ips/mail/msg05855.html > >The immediate data digest failures however, are not intended to >be recoverable with R2Ts since an iSCSI (and SCSI) task is not >instantiated in that case (rev07, section 7.2). The rationale >was that it is much easier for the initiator to re-ship the entire >PDU (command+immediate) than build a new data PDU with a Write-data >header (if only a part, command, of the rejected PDU were accepted >on the target). Also, accepting partial PDUs didn't seem to make >it easier for targets either. > >New wording dealing with immediate data digest failures had already >been added to section 7.2, to appear in rev08. > >Thanks. >-- >Mallikarjun > > >Mallikarjun Chadalapaka >Networked Storage Architecture >Network Storage Solutions Organization >MS 5668 Hewlett-Packard, Roseville. >cbm@rose.hp.com > >>Julian, >> >>I dont know if this has been already discussed. If so forgive me and point >>me to the link please. >> >>In Section 7.4, in draft 7 (page 115)it is stated that the target may >>request retransmission >>with a R2T. It then goes on to say that non-data PDU. It does not talk >about >>unsolicited data PDUs, explicitly. >>I presume that data digest errors in unsolicited and immediate data PDUs >>cannot be retried and should be responded >>with delivery-subsystem failure. Is this correct? If so, why is this >>requirement ? >> >>In section 7.11.1, page 119, the spec. implies that digest errors in data >>PDUs may be recovered by issuing R2T. Once again, >>it fails to talk about digest errors in immediate data unsolicited data >>PDUs. >> >>Thanks >> >>Deva >>Platys communications
Home Last updated: Tue Sep 04 01:03:57 2001 6315 messages in chronological order |