Re: iSCSI over TLS

["Julian Satran" <Julian_Satran@il.ibm.com>]

Dave,

It is not me you have to blame. Neither on the list nor on face-to-face 
the group could not reach a consensus on making it must for the sender if 
the receiver so wishes.

Julo




Dave Sheehy <dbs@acropora.rose.agilent.com>
Sent by: owner-ips@ece.cmu.edu
08-11-01 22:42
Please respond to Dave Sheehy

 
        To:     ips@ece.cmu.edu (IETF IP SAN Reflector)
        cc: 
        Subject:        Re: iSCSI over TLS

 

Julo,

> A group of us seriously considered TLS. The main reason for dropping it 
> was that it would interfere with any mechanism we could think of doing 
> framing and steering and we thought that framing and steering are 
> essential at 10Gbps and over.

If framing and steering "are essential" (your words) then why is framing
not a MUST in the spec? And why are so many implementers stating (or 
hinting)
that they are NOT going to implement it? I think there is a major 
disconnect
here. iSCSI w/o framing or markers is dead in the water IMHO.

Dave Sheehy