RE: iSCSI: Decimal encoding - why 64 bits ?

["Julian Satran" <Julian_Satran@il.ibm.com>]

That is not completely correct. Port numbers are 16 bit binary strings. TPGT are 16 bit strings.
Over 100 FCs use decimal encoding for binary fields.
I addition once you have the decimal-to-binary conversion it makes to sense to forbid it.
Elizabeth is correct we should not do what Pat suggests.

Julo

pat_thaler@agilent.com Sent by: owner-ips@ece.cmu.edu 07/07/2002 05:22 AM Please respond to pat_thaler

To:                 cc:        ips@ece.cmu.edu         Subject:        RE: iSCSI: Decimal encoding - why 64 bits ?

Elizabeth,

None of the examples given use the binary-value value type defined in 4.1. To iSCSI they are all text-values. The issue a number of us have is with binary value (where iSCSI has to convert the value to binary). The only place binary-value is used is in the SRP and CHAP keys. There are at least three ways to address this (in order of my preference, highest first):

1. Change the binary value definition to the current definition for large-binary-value, delete large-binary-value and regular-binary-value from the text formats and change occurrences of large-binary-value to binary-value.

2. Change the upper limit on regular-binary-value to 32 bits.

3. Change SRP and CHAP keys to use large-binary-value.

Regards,
Pat

-----Original Message-----
From: Elizabeth G. Rodriguez [mailto:Elizabeth.G.Rodriguez@123mail.net]
Sent: Saturday, July 06, 2002 8:31 AM
To: 'Julian Satran (Actcom)'; 'Robert Snively'; 'Martins Krikis';
Black_David@emc.com
Cc: ips@ece.cmu.edu
Subject: RE: iSCSI: Decimal encoding - why 64 bits ?


Given these examples, I believe that restricting decimal encoded binary
strings is not an option.

Elizabeth Rodriguez

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-ips@ece.cmu.edu [mailto:owner-ips@ece.cmu.edu] On Behalf Of
Julian Satran (Actcom)
Sent: Saturday, July 06, 2002 1:25 AM
To: Robert Snively; 'Martins Krikis'; Black_David@emc.com
Cc: ips@ece.cmu.edu
Subject: Re: iSCSI: Decimal encoding - why 64 bits ?

You may want to add to the list port-numbers, domain specific name
formats
(yes some domains mainly phone systems use decimal encodings).

A search for decimal encoded binary strings in the RFC domain gave well
over
one-hundred results.

Julo
----- Original Message -----
From: "Robert Snively" <rsnively@brocade.com>
To: "'Martins Krikis'" <mkrikis@yahoo.com>; "Julian Satran (Actcom)"
<Julian_Satran@actcom.net.il>; <Black_David@emc.com>
Cc: <ips@ece.cmu.edu>
Sent: Saturday, July 06, 2002 2:37 AM
Subject: RE: iSCSI: Decimal encoding - why 64 bits ?


> The most common example would probably be the
> IP address, which is a binary value.
> It is often presented
> as four separate decimal numbers for no reason
> I can think of, except perhaps a feeling that
> hexadecimal numbers were somehow less user
> friendly for inexperienced users.
>
> See RFC 0790 and RFC 0791.
>
> Bob
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Martins Krikis [mailto:mkrikis@yahoo.com]
> > Sent: Friday, July 05, 2002 7:42 AM
> > To: Julian Satran (Actcom); Black_David@emc.com
> > Cc: ips@ece.cmu.edu
> > Subject: Re: iSCSI: Decimal encoding - why 64 bits ?
> >
> >
> >
> > --- "Julian Satran (Actcom)"
> > <Julian_Satran@actcom.net.il> wrote:
> > > Martins - you have a very good point - and we
> > > considered briefly to forbid
> > > decimal from the outset but many of the team felt
> > > that this  would be a bad
> > > idea as values get copied from a context to another.
> > > And the we looked at
> > > coding for other RFCs and we found decimal
> > > everywhere - addresses,
> > > identifiers, ports etc., and thought it would be a
> > > bad idea to forbid them
> > > in iSCSI
> >
> > Julian,
> >
> > I cannot find a single post on this mailing list
> > saying that forbidding decimal encoding for binary
> > items would be a bad idea. I did find several (and
> > quoted 4) that actually recommended dropping decimal
> > encoding for binary items. Lately there have been
> > many more such posts. All those other RFCs, I
> > suspect, are actually dealing with numbers. I have
> > no objections to using decimal encoding for numbers
> > (that is things, that normally fit in your
> > machine's registers and are treated as numerical,
> > not as bit-strings). You have yet to provide an
> > example of something that is clearly a binary
> > string (and not used as a number) and is being
> > commonly encoded in decimal. If you find such a
> > thing, can you tell us what's the scheme for telling
> > how many null-bytes this binary string starts with?
> >
> > Martins Krikis, Intel Corp.
> >
> > Disclaimer: these opinions are mine and may not
> >              be those of my employer.
> >
> >
> > __________________________________________________
> > Do You Yahoo!?
> > Sign up for SBC Yahoo! Dial - First Month Free
> > http://sbc.yahoo.com
> >