|
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: iSCSI: Confusing wording in description of Status-ClassI will say exception but not MUST as you may not to follow redirection before consulting an oracle :-) (only partly joking). Julo
We have run into misinterpretations of the description of Status-Class (section 9.13.5). As written, it can be misread to say that Redirection (Status-Class = 1) is an error, and initiators can treat a redirection response from a target by failing the I/O rather than by following the redirection pointer. The current wording is: A non-zero Status-Class indicates an exception. In this case, Status- Class is sufficient for a simple initiator to use when handling errors, without having to look at the Status-Detail. The Status- Detail allows finer-grained error recovery for more sophisticated initiators, as well as better information for error logging. ... 1 - Redirection - indicates that the initiator must take further action to complete the request. This is usually due to the target moving to a different address. ... I would propose the following rewording: A non-zero Status-Class indicates an exception. In this case, Status- Class is sufficient for a simple initiator to use when handling exceptionss, without having to look at the Status-Detail. The Status- Detail allows finer-grained exception handling for more sophisticated initiators, as well as better information for error logging. ... 1 - Redirection - indicates that the initiator MUST take further action to complete the request. This is usually due to the target moving to a different address. ... The wording changes are: replace "error" by "exception" in the first paragraph, since redirects are not errors, and use "MUST" rather than "must" in the description of redirect. paul
Home Last updated: Wed May 29 13:19:53 2002 10380 messages in chronological order |