|
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: Question On R2T Behaviour?
Suresh,
The only statement that can be made is that the target is the master of
the data transfers.
For the case you describe any of the behaviors you describe is legal.
The behavior is defined by SSCSI (SAM).
The results are implementation dependent.
The only think that we might say is that the results "should match
expectation" and "the residual counts should match transfers".
In practical terms you will find many targets that will terminate the
transfer with an error status if an R2T request is not properly
fulfilled.
Julo
"Suresh Tanjore" <sureshtk@aarohicommunications.com>
Sent by: owner-ips@ece.cmu.edu
16-11-01 19:39
Please respond to "Suresh Tanjore"
To: <ips@ece.cmu.edu>
cc:
Subject: Question On R2T Behaviour?
Hi all,
On page 75 of iSCSi 0.8 revision
" The data length of the DATA PDU MUST *not exceed* the
desired
data transer length specified in the R2T. If the R2T is
answered
with a sequence of data PDUs the buffer offset and Length
must be within the range of those specfied by R2T, the
last PDU
SHOULD have the F bit set to 1. The data-out PDU ordering
is goverened
by DataPDUInOrder."
My question is if the data length of the DATA PDU is less than
the desired data transfer length and the F bit is set, what should be the
behaviour of the target. For the sake of this discussion let us
assume DataPDUInOrder to be set to Yes.
1. It looks intutive that target may send another R2T
with different
sequence number and collect the data initially that
the host
was not able to send for the previous R2T request.
Or
2. It is an error that need to be detected by target that
the host was not
able to fully satisfy the R2T request sent by the
target in the first
place.
Please let me know what is the right behaviour and should this be
documented
in the
specification if it is not already documented. If it is documented may be
i
missed
reading this, please point to me where it is defined.
Thanks
sureshtk
Home Last updated: Sun Nov 18 10:17:57 2001 7845 messages in chronological order |