SORT BY:

LIST ORDER
THREAD
AUTHOR
SUBJECT


SEARCH

IPS HOME


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

    Re: FW: Redirection (was UNH Plugfest 5)




    Paul version 1 is acceptable and that is what David and I where saying most of the time - Julo


    Paul Koning <pkoning@equallogic.com>

    17/01/03 21:22

    To
    Julian Satran/Haifa/IBM@IBMIL
    cc
    Black_David@emc.com, ips@ece.cmu.edu
    Subject
    Re: FW: Redirection (was UNH Plugfest 5)





    >>>>> "Julian" == Julian Satran <Julian_Satran@il.ibm.com> writes:

    Julian> David, The only way to do it cleany the way you want it is to
    Julian> allow the redirect response (0101 and 0102) only in
    Julian> operational parameter stage.  But that seems rather
    Julian> excessive. If we want to mandate a single way of handling I
    Julian> would suggest stating that 0101 and 0102 SHOULD be accepted
    Julian> even during authentication (Paul's POV). Again I don't thing
    Julian> it adds anything as local policy may prevent an initiator
    Julian> from considering those values.

    "SHOULD" is helpful in that at least it gives a recommendation.  But
    it is not good enough.

    We want to build targets that interoperate with all initiators.  Right
    now, the spec simply does not permit us to achieve this goal.  

    I've expressed a preference in how things would work, but it doesn't
    matter a whole lot which way things go.  

    Right now, we have an implementation that will issue a redirect before
    completing the full authentication handshake.  Most initiators accept
    this, but some do not.

    We're perfectly willing to change it so the target does complete the
    whole authentication handshake, and only then sends the redirect.  But
    we're afraid to do so because the spec does not require initiators to
    accept that either!

    So we're faced with a known interop problem, and if we change the
    behavior to the other possible way we are at risk of running into
    other initiators that don't like doing things THAT way.

    So pick one, but it MUST be a MUST.

    1. An initiator MUST accept a redirect from a target that has
      completed the authentication handshake; it MAY (or SHOULD) accept
      it from a target that has not yet completed the handshake.

    or

    2. An initiator MUST accept a redirect from a target that has not yet
      completed the authentication handshake; it SHOULD (or MAY) accept
      it from a target that has completed the handshake.

    Well, of course there's a third alternative, which is to require that
    both alternatives MUST be accepted.  I do not propose that but would
    not object to it.

       paul




Home

Last updated: Mon Jan 20 18:19:04 2003
12220 messages in chronological order