SORT BY:

LIST ORDER
THREAD
AUTHOR
SUBJECT


SEARCH

IPS HOME


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

    Re: iSCSI : versions and draft no.s (fwd)



    
    Julian, Subrahmanya:
    
    The consensus amoung consortium members for the next plugfest
    was NOT to implement an X- key for this extension, but rather
    to agree to configure the implementations for a specific
    draft prior to testing and then have login requests and
    responses carry in the their version-max,
    version-min, version-active fields only values allowed by
    that draft (so for drafts 11 and after those fields could
    contain only 0).
    
    This means that targets and initiators can not adapt
    dynamically to the other side of the connection,
    (they are statically configured to 1 draft only) but for
    the plugfest environment this was not considered essential.
    The overriding consideration was that implementing an X-
    key was a waste of everybody's time, since it would
    become invalid as soon as the standard was approved.
    
    
    Bob Russell
    InterOperability Lab
    University of New Hampshire
    rdr@iol.unh.edu
    603-862-3774
    
    On Tue, 21 May 2002, Julian Satran wrote:
    
    > That is still the case - Julo
    >
    >
    >
    >
    > Subrahmanya Sastry K V <skotra@npd.hcltech.com>
    > Sent by: owner-ips@ece.cmu.edu
    > 05/21/2002 03:15 PM
    > Please respond to Subrahmanya Sastry K V
    >
    >
    >         To:     ips@ece.cmu.edu
    >         cc:
    >         Subject:        iSCSI : versions and draft no.s
    >
    >
    >
    > Hi all,
    >
    > I would like to know the final word on the earlier discussion on the
    > absence of a clear mapping between the iscsi draft version no.s and the
    > various drafts.
    >
    > The last suggestion I saw in an earlier thread was that we could use a
    > vendor specific X-draft=<draft version(s)>  key, values to indicate the
    > supported draft versions. The same was seconded by Julo for the
    > plugfest. Is this the final conclusion for an implementation to support
    > multiple versions ?
    >
    > Thanks
    > --
    > Subrahmanya Sastry K V
    > Member Technical Staff
    > HCL Tech, Chennai, INDIA
    > http://san.hcltech.com
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    
    


Home

Last updated: Fri May 24 21:18:32 2002
10321 messages in chronological order