RE: iSCSI: NOPs on discovery session

["Ayman Ghanem" <aghanem@cisco.com>]

If the initiator choose to keep the discovery session up, the target could
use it to inform the initiator of new targets or LUNs it can access.

-Ayman


> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-ips@ece.cmu.edu [mailto:owner-ips@ece.cmu.edu]On Behalf Of
> John Hufferd
> Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001 4:20 AM
> To: Ayman Ghanem
> Cc: ips@ece.cmu.edu
> Subject: RE: iSCSI: NOPs on discovery session
>
>
>
> I do not see any reason to keep the decovery session up.  Why would it be
> needed to stay up?
>
> .
> .
> .
> John L. Hufferd
> Senior Technical Staff Member (STSM)
> IBM/SSG San Jose Ca
> Main Office (408) 256-0403, Tie: 276-0403,  eFax: (408) 904-4688
> Home Office (408) 997-6136, Cell: (408) 499-9702
> Internet address: hufferd@us.ibm.com
>
>
> "Ayman Ghanem" <aghanem@cisco.com>@ece.cmu.edu on 12/05/2001 09:37:34 PM
>
> Sent by:  owner-ips@ece.cmu.edu
>
>
> To:   <ips@ece.cmu.edu>
> cc:
> Subject:  RE: iSCSI: NOPs on discovery session
>
>
>
>
> Julian,
>
> I would vote for  allowing it. Is the spec going to require the initiator
> to logout immediately  after the SendTargets response is received?. Should
> the target drop the session  after it had sent the response?. I
> am not sure
> how the  discovery session could be misused. It has been
> authenticated like
> any other  session and has only limited set of commands. One could also
> argue the need for  logout on a discovery session as opposed to just
> closing the  connection.
>
> -Ayman
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-ips@ece.cmu.edu  [mailto:owner-ips@ece.cmu.edu]On Behalf Of
> Julian  Satran
> Sent: Tuesday, December 04, 2001 1:05 AM
> To:  ips@ece.cmu.edu
> Subject: Re: iSCSI: NOPs on discovery  session
>
>
>
> Ayman,
>
> It is true that I agreed that we may want  to have it. However
> some members
> of the list have expressed immediately a  strong opposition to it claiming
> that it was no strictly needed (true) and  that discovery section
> are meant
> to be brief.
> I felt thus that we don't have a consensus on that and we may want to  try
> again.
> I assume that the main  concern was that this will enable discovery
> sessions to be become long lived  and be used as a back door monitoring
> channel.
>
> Regards,
> Julo
>
>
>
>
>
>                              "Ayman Ghanem"
>
>                              <aghanem@cisco.com>              To:
>
>                              Sent by:
> <ips@ece.cmu.edu>
>                              owner-ips@ece.cmu.edu            cc:
>
>                                                               
> Subject:
>                              12-04-01 05:30 AM        iSCSI: NOPs
> on
>                                                       discovery
> session
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Julian,
>
> I thought we agreed to adding NOPs to the operations  allowed on the
> discovery session. I couldn't find that in draft-09.  Thanks.
>
> -Ayman
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>