SORT BY:

LIST ORDER
THREAD
AUTHOR
SUBJECT


SEARCH

IPS HOME


    [Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

    Re: iSCSI - Change - Login/Text commands with the binary stage co de



    Stephen,
    
    1.If the initiator goes away for a while and reboots and there was no
    activity on the connections
    the target may see a session alive (I am not sure that it has to appear on
    the state diagram but maybe).
    
    2.Again - I am not sure that the curent state diagram includes death of the
    initiator
    
    Julo
    
    "Wheat, Stephen R" <stephen.r.wheat@intel.com>@ece.cmu.edu on 23-08-2001
    19:58:34
    
    Please respond to "Wheat, Stephen R" <stephen.r.wheat@intel.com>
    
    Sent by:  owner-ips@ece.cmu.edu
    
    
    To:   ips@ece.cmu.edu
    cc:
    Subject:  Re: iSCSI - Change - Login/Text commands with the binary stage co
          de
    
    
    
    Julian,
    
    1.3.6 ISID states that the target should check to see if the old session is
    still active when a duplicate session is detected.
    
    I have two questions, the second only if you answer in the affirmative on
    the first ;^)
    
    1. Is there a properly executed sequence of events (i.e., no coding error
    on
    the target side) where the session is not active, but the target hadn't
    taken notice of it?  It appears this as a protocol-specified means to work
    around a flaw in a target's implementation.  I interpret the state diagram
    transitions as being atomic wrt other commands.  I.e., the last logout
    would
    result in the various transitions of the connection/session prior to the
    initiator starting the session up again.  And the target would have
    completed the transitions prior to handling a new session request.
    
    2. If you answered (1) in the affirmative, then the word "Active" is not
    consistent with the 6.3 Session State Diagram.  Does this mean the target
    got lost, due to transport failures of any sort, in its transition from
    Q3-to-Q2-to-Q1?  It sounds like the intent is to close the old session if
    the session was in Q2 or Q4, presuming if it were in Q1,  it would not have
    been found as a duplicate.
    
    Stephen
    
    
    
    
    


Home

Last updated: Tue Sep 04 01:03:55 2001
6315 messages in chronological order