|
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] RE: iSCSI: numeric-range format question (pedantic)WADR I do not see an interoperability issue - you just implement both anyway and you admit for range both (it is not even costlier). Julo
Julian, I guess now I question whether clearer wording is needed to specify that both are acceptable ( or not) I reasoned, that a range must be offered and a single value returned in reply. It is easier to check for the lack of the "~" to denote a single value. If 4096~4096 is allowed, then I must decode both values and ensure that they are indeed the same. This is not a big issue, but I would prefer that the spec pick one way or the other. I see no value in allowing both. Right now, we have an interoperabilty issue. Kevin -----Original Message----- From: Julian Satran [mailto:Julian_Satran@il.ibm.com] Sent: Wednesday, February 05, 2003 4:04 PM To: kevin_lemay@agilent.com Cc: blandry@crossroads.com; ips@ece.cmu.edu; owner-ips@ece.cmu.edu Subject: RE: iSCSI: numeric-range format question (pedantic) obviously 4096~4096 is also valid (but redundant). Julo kevin_lemay@agilent.com Sent by: owner-ips@ece.cmu.edu 06/02/03 01:48 To blandry@crossroads.com, ips@ece.cmu.edu cc Subject RE: iSCSI: numeric-range format question (pedantic) Buck, I coded it this way.... OFMarkInt=4096 If you don't fine the "~" delimiter then it is a single value. I would interpret 4096~4096 as a range with only one acceptable value. Kevin -----Original Message----- From: Buck Landry [mailto:blandry@crossroads.com] Sent: Wednesday, February 05, 2003 3:35 PM To: ips@ece.cmu.edu Subject: iSCSI: numeric-range format question (pedantic) Is it draft 20's intent that any numeric-range may be represented by a single numerical-value, if that value is the only one acceptable? I ask because: -- the definition for numeric-range does not mention this (5.1) -- OFMarkInt and IFMarkInt are defined as <numeric-range> for offers (A.3.2) -- .. but the description for these keys says "In case it only wants a specific value, only a single value has to be specified". There are three conclusions I might make: a) When the draft says "only a single value has to be specified", it means only that (for instance) 4096~4096 might be specified. b) x is valid shorthand for x~x, but only for OFMarkInt and IFMarkInt c) x is valid shorthand for x~x, for any theoretical numeric-range The safest choice is obviously c). If the intent was actually a), would somebody please speak up. Thanks, --buck
Home Last updated: Thu Feb 06 10:19:12 2003 12294 messages in chronological order |