|
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] RE: iscsi : iscsi parameter default valuesIs there any target today that will handle ImmediateData without a significant change to the transport API? Also is there any target that does use out of order R2Ts? (Just curious) > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-ips@ece.cmu.edu [mailto:owner-ips@ece.cmu.edu]On Behalf Of > Julian Satran > Sent: Thursday, September 27, 2001 9:50 AM > To: ips@ece.cmu.edu > Subject: RE: iscsi : iscsi parameter default values > > > > The one that I have trouble living with is ImmediateData. This is > important > for low-end desktops and hardly matters for large boxes. > As such I would suggest it stays as yes. > > Julo > > > > > "Eddy > > Quicksall" To: "'Santosh Rao'" > <santoshr@cup.hp.com>, > <EQuicksall@med <ips@ece.cmu.edu> > > iaone.net> cc: > > Sent by: Subject: RE: iscsi > : iscsi parameter default values > owner-ips@ece.c > > mu.edu > > > > > > 27-09-01 17:22 > > Please respond > > to "Eddy > > Quicksall" > > > > > > > > > I like your defaults below. > > But, section 5 says: > > The initial Login request MUST include the InitiatorName and > SessionType key=value pairs. > > Since SessionType is REQUIRED, naming a default would imply a > possible typo > in the spec. > > Eddy > > -----Original Message----- > From: Santosh Rao [mailto:santoshr@cup.hp.com] > Sent: Wednesday, September 26, 2001 10:29 PM > To: ips@ece.cmu.edu > Subject: iscsi : iscsi parameter default values > > > All, > > With the issue of mode page vs. login keys having [almost] drawn to a > close, I would like to > raise the below issues again, on the subject of default values for login > keys and other iscsi > parameters : > > > * In keeping with traditional use of scsi mode pages, iscsi should > not specify any default > settings for any mode pages that continue to exist for iscsi. > "Default values" for mode > pages are target specific and should not be bound to the protocol > draft. > > * MORE IMPORTANTLY, I read the default for EMDP as being set to 1 > :-< This implies that > targets must be always prepared to deal with out of order data and > initiators must be > prepared to deal with out of order data, unless the initiator > performs a mode select to > disable it. [which defeats all the previous advantages gained thru > mandating use of login > keys for other negotiations.]. A default, if it were to exist, > should be 0. (in-order, by > default). > > * Conservative specification of defaults for login keys along the > following lines : > MaxConnections = 1 > FMarker = "no" > InitialR2T = "yes" > BidiInitialR2T = "yes" > ImmediateData = "no" > DataPDULength = 16 > MaxOutstandingR2T = 1 > DataPDUInOrder = "yes" > ErrorRecoveryLevel = 0 > SessionType = "normal" > > * Should the iscsi protocol require a "Lun Control Mode Page"? IOW, > is an EnableCRN bit > required at the transport layer ? If the device server capability > is to be negotiated , I > suggest this bit be moved to a SCSI ULP Mode Page such as the > "Control Mode Page", through a > T10 change as a part of the SCSI changes being driven by iscsi. > > Comments ? > > Thanks, > Santosh > > > Santosh Rao wrote: > > > There are the separate issues of : > > > > * iscsi's specification of defaults for its mode pages which is not > in line with mode page > > usage. This impacts the target's ability to enforce values other > than the protocol > > specified default, if the initiator were to not use mode > sense/select. > > > > * default settings for login keys. > > > > * Is there a need for the "LUN Control Mode Page" and whether > "Enable CRN" should be in a > > transport specific mode page ? > > > > which need to be driven to closure as well. > > > > Regards, > > Santosh > > > > > > > >
Home Last updated: Fri Sep 28 18:17:18 2001 6838 messages in chronological order |