Re: iSCSI: response reason

["Mallikarjun C." <cbm@rose.hp.com>]

Julian,

I was about to send a message to you on this myself.

I think it's better to leave the wording in 12-96 as is, and
change the "Reason" to "Response reason" in the table in
section 9.4.6.2.

The problem with the changed wording in 12-97 is that
it still does not mention the sense key, and states something
that isn't accurate (for ex., there is no 'Sense of "protocol
service CRC error" ', the SPC-3 name for it is "CRC error
detected").  The more descriptive "reason" terminology is
an iSCSI notion we had adopted quite a while ago.

I reason I had used "Response reason" as in index into the
said table is to avoid repeating the CHECKCONDITION/Key/
ASC/ASCQ information everywhere - but I had overlooked that the
table doesn't use "response reason".  I'd recommend fixing just
that.

Thanks.
--
Mallikarjun

Mallikarjun Chadalapaka
Networked Storage Architecture
Network Storage Solutions
Hewlett-Packard MS 5668
Roseville CA 95747
cbm@rose.hp.com

----- Original Message -----
From: "Julian Satran" <Julian_Satran@il.ibm.com>
To: <Eddy@Quicksall.com>
Cc: <ips@ece.cmu.edu>; "Julian Satran" <Julian_Satran@il.ibm.com>
Sent: Friday, June 07, 2002 7:07 AM
Subject: Re: iSCSI: response reason


> thanks - it is fixed in 12-97 - Julo
>
>
>
>                       "Eddy Quicksall"
>                       <Eddy@Quicksall.c        To:       Julian Satran/Haifa/IBM@IBMIL
>                       om>                      cc:       <ips@ece.cmu.edu>
>                                                Subject:  iSCSI: response reason
>                       06/06/2002 11:28
>                       PM
>                       Please respond to
>                       Eddy
>
>
>
>
>
> Section 6.5 Digest Errors uses the phrase "iSCSI response reason" and
> refers to section 9.4.3. But there is no such term used in that section.
>
> There is, however, a term used called "iSCSI service response". But,
> section 6.5 is not talking about that.
>
> I believe section 6.5 is talking about the heading "reason" that appears in
> the 1st column of the table in section 9.4.6.2.
>
> So to clarify things, how about changing the table heading in 9.4.6.2 to
> say "iSCSI Condition" and section 6.5 to say "iSCSI Condition (Section
> 9.4.6.2  Sense Data)?
>
> The term "iSCSI Condition" is also compatible with the same term used in
> the 2nd paragraph of 9.4.6.2.
>
> Eddy
>
>
>
>