|
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: iSCSI: SNACK R2T/DataMatthew, We have gone through this thread of discussion regarding DataSNa long time back on ips and the consensus has been that I/O transfer sizes are not large enough to justify OUT_OF_BAND acknowledgement of data. [achieved by having the initiator generate NOP-OUTs in response to received data pdu's to send a DataSN ack.] The primary dis-advantage with that scheme was that the data ack's were being generated out-of-band, and therefore, implied extra cost in terms of initiator resources for each I/O, as well as increased wire traffic per I/O, performance penalty, etc. I am opposed to the draft requiring initiators to send out-of-band ack's to data pdu's through the use of initiator generated NOP-OUT pdus. This is a performance penalty, a resource overhead, and not really justified in most I/O traffic due to the avg. data xfer sizes. Regards, Santosh Julian Satran wrote: > Matthew, > > I am also in favor of such a mechanism. It is easy to implement (another > form of SNACK) and we have already built-in a mechanism by which an inbound > stream can be marked for acking (the inbound sequence separator F bit). > It can also be specified as mandated only if the within-command recovery > class is present. > > However I am reluctant to open again this issue except if there are more > supporters. Data ACKs where hastily dropped at the interim meeting in > Orlando. I recall Somesh Gupta, Pierre Labat and Santosh Rao as being very > vocal against them (arguing complexity) and carrying the room with them. > > Julo > > > "BURBRIDGE,MATTH > EW To: Julian Satran/Haifa/IBM@IBMIL, > (HP-UnitedKingdo ips@ece.cmu.edu > m,ex2)" cc: > <matthew_burbrid Subject: RE: iSCSI: SNACK R2T/Data > ge@hp.com> > > 19-09-01 17:25 > Please respond > to > "BURBRIDGE,MATTH > EW > (HP-UnitedKingdo > m,ex2)" > > > > I am very much in favour of having a positive ACK mechanism to control > buffer resources at the target. If there is a very large transfer (e.g. 1 > Mb) then the sender can release buffer space once it knows that the > receiver > has received the data. It is worth pointing out that this mechanism is for > buffer control and is not for flow control which, as we all know, is > handled > by TCP. > > Cheers > > Matthew Burbridge > Senior Development Engineer > NIS-Bristol > Hewlett Packard > Telnet: 312 7010 > E-mail: matthewb@bri.hp.com > > -----Original Message----- > From: Julian Satran [mailto:Julian_Satran@il.ibm.com] > Sent: Wednesday, September 19, 2001 6:28 AM > To: ips@ece.cmu.edu > Subject: Re: iSCSI: SNACK R2T/Data > > There is no ACK mechanism. The group wisdom was that there is no need for > one. > Incoming data and R2Ts are not acked (a mechanism that did that existed and > was based on NOP-Out). > > Julo > > Michael Schoberg <michael_schoberg@cnt.com> on 18-09-2001 19:09:51 > > Please respond to Michael Schoberg <michael_schoberg@cnt.com> > > To: "'ips@ece.cmu.edu'" <ips@ece.cmu.edu>, Julian Satran/Haifa/IBM@IBMIL > cc: > Subject: iSCSI: SNACK R2T/Data > > Old subject, but I couldn't find any discussion on this: > > When does the target know it no longer needs to hold R2T & Data PDUs? > StatSN responses are acknowledged through the ExpStatSN field received in > future I->T requests. What's the acknowledgement method for R2T & Data > PDUs? Is it tied to the original request and acknowledged through the > ExpStatSN acknowledgment of the request's response? > > Thanks. begin:vcard n:Rao;Santosh tel;work:408-447-3751 x-mozilla-html:FALSE org:Hewlett Packard, Cupertino.;SISL adr:;;19420, Homestead Road, M\S 43LN, ;Cupertino.;CA.;95014.;USA. version:2.1 email;internet:santoshr@cup.hp.com title:Software Design Engineer x-mozilla-cpt:;21088 fn:Santosh Rao end:vcard
Home Last updated: Mon Sep 24 22:17:19 2001 6705 messages in chronological order |