Re: [rddp] Re: iSCSI/iWARP drafts and flow control

[wrstuden@wasabisystems.com]

On Sat, 9 Aug 2003, Caitlin Bestler wrote:

> The rules suggested shift the burden of flow control
> to the sender, where it should be. Rule enforcement
> at the sending side can also be quite lax if other
> implementation specific rules limit the number of
> untagged messages that could be sent.

Sorry for my delay in responding.

One of the things I've been wondering through this whole thread is can't
we expand iSCSI negotiation to handle these parameters (like how many
async messages are ok, how many immediate commands, etc.)? That way, to
the extent that iSCSI/iWARP needs new parameters, we can decide on them
out easily.

Maybe it's been in everyone's thoughts, but the thread had been talking
about needing new limits and talking like it's hard to do. Can't we just
negotiate them?

Take care,

Bill