|
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] RE: iSCSI: login issue - partial consensus callMarj, You mention vendors not knowing how to play right. The problem is that iSCSI does not and will not specify how two HBAs from different vendors installed in the same Initiator should or could get a range of ISIDs for their exclusive use. This will be operating system specific and vendor defined. It is uncertain that the same tool or repository would be used by all HBA vendors in any environment. Given this, accidental overlap in ISID space is not unlikely. Given that there is no one way to play right, we must make sure that everyone can at least play nice. My expectation is that sessions are infrequently established and long lived. ISIDs may be re-used at will by their current owners. When no "already owned" ISIDs are available, or an attempt to re-use an "already owned" ISID failed, and HBA would need to a) "probe" for a new available ISID or b) fail the request to establish the session. Session recovery should not be attempted unless a session is known to have failed. If tools are available, and the administrator has used them correctly, then HBAs will not collide in ISID space. If the tools are not available or were not used correctly, I would hope the second HBA can still attempt to come up without impacting the sessions established by the first. Again, I state my support for a login with existing ISID harmlessly fails (the Target state does not change) unless a session recovery indicator is set. Also if a session recovery indicator is set, and the ISID is not in use (by this Initiator at this Target), the login also fails. Thanks, Nick -----Original Message----- From: KRUEGER,MARJORIE (HP-Roseville,ex1) [mailto:marjorie_krueger@hp.com] Sent: Friday, August 31, 2001 12:09 PM To: Martin, Nick; ips@ece.cmu.edu Subject: RE: iSCSI: login issue - partial consensus call > In particular this enables independent agents within the same initiator to > attempt a login without knowing all ISIDs in use by other agents. Each > agent would know the ISID of sessions it had successfully established, but > not the ISIDs for sessions established by others. It can use the ISIDs it > knows to recover sessions it owns. If an agent gets a failure attempting to > establish a new session, it would pick a different ISID and > retry (or just quit), rather than disrupting a session of another agent. The intent of the presentation on SCSI/iSCSI modeling, and the text in the draft, is to illustrate how this example is not a recommended implementation choice due to the probability of violating the SCSI/iSCSI rules pointed out. If the "independant agents" had partitioned the ISID space, there would be no collision on login and no time wasted. Your illustrated implementation could spend significant time "trying" ISID's in use by the "other agents". However, I'm starting to have more sympathy with Julian's concerns due to the apparent risks of different vendors' initiator implementations not following the rules. I just imagined having vendor A's HBA installed and happily servicing applications, installing vendor B's "plug-n-play" implementation, and having all A's sessions aborted cause B doesn't know how to play right :-( Marj
Home Last updated: Thu Sep 06 15:17:04 2001 6384 messages in chronological order |