SORT BY:

LIST ORDER
THREAD
AUTHOR
SUBJECT


SEARCH

IPS HOME


    [Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

    RE: iSCSI: Questions regarding text parameter 'Reject' and 'Irrel evant' usage



    
    My comments were only addressing Boolean and Irrelevant.  Which has been
    discussed in great detail, and what you see is what was agreed.  And these
    functions have also been implemented and have been shown to work in many
    implementation and shown at the plugfests.  The point of last call is to
    bring up items that have not been fully discussed, and resolved.  (You may
    want to review the archives to see what was covered on these topics in the
    past.)
    
    We need to focus on things that are broken, and editorial fixes.
    
    .
    .
    .
    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
    
    
    "Fischer, Michael" <Michael_Fischer@adaptec.com> on 04/24/2002 09:03:19 AM
    
    To:    John Hufferd/San Jose/IBM@IBMUS
    cc:    "'ips@ece.cmu.edu'" <ips@ece.cmu.edu>
    Subject:    RE: iSCSI: Questions regarding text parameter 'Reject' and
           'Irrel     evant' usage
    
    
    
    
    Ok, I am probably sticking my nose where it doesn't belong but... If there
    is a post to the working group in reference to the spec doesn't that
    indicate that the spec is ambiguous and should be examined in more detail?
    People that start working with iSCSI after the draft phase may have the
    same
    questions and should be able to find the answer in the spec and not have to
    sort through electronic reams of newsgroup posts to determine the
    appropriate result.  I know that the spec has to tread a narrow line so as
    not to mandate implementation but at the same time the spec has to be clear
    enough that someone can come along and make an implementation and be fairly
    reassured that their implementation will interoperate with someone else's.
    
    Just my $.02, well more like $1.50.
    
    Michael Fischer
    
    Disclaimer:  Obviously, these opinions are mine and mine alone and I fully
    expect to get flamed for them.
    
    -----Original Message-----
    From: John Hufferd [mailto:hufferd@us.ibm.com]
    Sent: Tuesday, April 23, 2002 10:59 PM
    To: Martins Krikis
    Cc: ips@ece.cmu.edu
    Subject: Re: iSCSI: Questions regarding text parameter 'Reject' and
    'Irrelevant' usage
    
    
    
    Lets see if we can avoid rehashing the issues around Boolean values.  This
    has been gone over and over on this list, and does not need to be redone in
    the last call.  Likewise the issues around Irrelevant.
    
    There may or may not be value around the rest of your statements, but lets
    not visit again  Boolean or Irrelevant .
    
    .
    .
    .
    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
    
    
    
    
    


Home

Last updated: Wed Apr 24 14:18:46 2002
9769 messages in chronological order