Re: iSCSI/iWARP drafts and flow control

[wrstuden@wasabisystems.com]

On Fri, 15 Aug 2003, Caitlin Bestler wrote:

> On Friday, August 15, 2003, at 08:04 PM, Mike Ko wrote:
>
> > As Caitlin pointed out, since no one has yet identified a specific
> > need for per-session negotiation of these credits, a simple rule
> > enumerated in the draft may be sufficient.
>
> Well, their negotiated credits in either case. It's just whether
> they are negotiated on a per-session basis by target and
> initiator, or negotiated on a mailing list on a per-protocol
> basis. If the volume of the mailing list negotiation gets
> too high, everyone will quickly agree to the per-session
> negotiations. ;-)

I'm not saying we can't just pick a number. But if I understand things,
one advantage of per-session negotiation might be that a target with fixed
buffering could offer different command windows to initiators that wanted
different numbers of immediate commands available. For an initiator that
is more comfortable advancing CmdSN (is happier with a lower number of
credits per CmdSN), a target could divy up its buffers to allow a wider
command window.

Take care,

Bill