|
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] RE: ips : Is FirstBurstSize valid when InitialR2T=yes ?Santosh, "Reject" is not an acceptable response in this situation. "Reject" for a numerical negotiation indicates that there was a problem with the value offered - it was out of the specified bounds. See 4.2 "The constants "None", "Reject", "Irrelevant", and "NotUnderstood" are reserved and must only be used as described here." and 4.2.2: "An offer of a value not admissible (e.g., not within the specified bounds) MAY be answered with the constant "Reject" or the responder MAY select an admissible value." (The other uses of Reject are specific to list and range negotiations.) The offered value was within the specified bounds so it should not be rejected. Regards, Pat -----Original Message----- From: Martin, Nick [mailto:Nick.Martin@compaq.com] Sent: Thursday, February 07, 2002 5:38 PM To: Eddy Quicksall Cc: Santosh Rao; IPS Reflector Subject: RE: ips : Is FirstBurstSize valid when InitialR2T=yes ? <snip> I think the value Irrelevant should be used sparingly. In this case, the values 512, Irrelevant, and Reject will have the same effect on subsequent packets on the wire unless and until ImmediateData or InitialR2T are negotiated again. At that time the current value of FirstBurstSize again becomes useful. There is some rule about least surprise which I can not quote at the moment, but given that these three possible return values produce the same result, I would send the 512 since that will be least surprising to the initiator. Remember that Irrelevant does not mean forgotten. There is still a current value in effect, even if the target chooses not to re-negotiate it at this time. I would not choose to refuse to accept the new value for FirstBurstSize. However if I wanted to so choose, I think I would use Reject. If the target does not support unsolicited nor immediate data and will never use the value FirstBurstSize, it could still keep a current value for the field. In doing so it will be less likely to force an initiator down a seldom trodden path. Thanks, Nick
Home Last updated: Fri Jun 14 14:18:42 2002 10820 messages in chronological order |