|
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] RE: [iSCSI] CmdSN for Text CommandSorry, I forgot that you said "I bit is NOT set". If the initiator doesn't set the I bit, then it would seem that CmdSN should increase. Eddy -----Original Message----- From: wrstuden@wasabisystems.com [mailto:wrstuden@wasabisystems.com] Sent: Wednesday, May 14, 2003 2:37 PM To: Eddy Quicksall Cc: Lakshmi Ramasubramanian; ips@ece.cmu.edu Subject: RE: [iSCSI] CmdSN for Text Command On Wed, 14 May 2003, Eddy Quicksall wrote: > I don't think the empty text command is to be treated like a new command. I > think they are talking about what paragraph 10.10.3 is calling "a sequence > of text requests and responses". True. I think it should just be sent as an immediate "command", but if you really want it to not be an immediate PDU, then it needs a new (in-window) CmdSN. It definitely though needs to have the same ITT as the original Text command. > -----Original Message----- > From: Lakshmi Ramasubramanian [mailto:nramas@windows.microsoft.com] > Sent: Wednesday, May 14, 2003 1:15 PM > To: ips@ece.cmu.edu > Subject: [iSCSI] CmdSN for Text Command > > Section 10.10.4 Target Transfer Tag (Text Request) > says that if F bit is set to 0 in Text Response, initiator > must send an empty text command so that the target can > send the next text response. Should the initiator use > the original CmdSN when it sends the empty text command > or should it use the next CmdSN (Assuming Immediate Bit > is NOT set in any of the Text Command PDUs)? > > Thanks! > -lakshmi >
Home Last updated: Wed May 14 15:19:23 2003 12584 messages in chronological order |