Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART Review of draft-ietf-storm-iscsimib-03.txt

Dan: Thank you very much your review. And Prakash, thank you for addressing Dan's concerns. I'm happy to recommend the document for approval in our next telechat.

Jari

On Apr 3, 2013, at 3:20 PM, "Romascanu, Dan (Dan)" <dromasca@avaya.com> wrote:

> Hi Prakash,
> 
> Thanks for this further clarification. 
> 
> From my perspective the document is Ready. 
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Dan
> 
> 
> 
> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Prakash Venkatesen, ERS-HCLTech [mailto:prakashvn@hcl.com]
>> Sent: Wednesday, April 03, 2013 3:16 PM
>> To: Romascanu, Dan (Dan); gen-art@ietf.org
>> Cc: mark_bakke@dell.com; david.black@emc.com; Martin Stiemerling;
>> storm@ietf.org
>> Subject: RE: Gen-ART Review of draft-ietf-storm-iscsimib-03.txt
>> 
>> Hi Dan,
>> An RFC 4544 based implementation should continue to work. The value of
>> iSCSIProtocolLevel to be 2 or higher is required to enable use of
>> features in iSCSI SCSI Feature update (iscsi-sam). The new objects are
>> required only when the iSCSIProtocolLevel is negotiated to 2 or higher.
>> It is defined as a Conditionally mandatory group. Please note the
>> corresponding portions of the MIB module below:
>> --
>> iscsiNewObjectsV2 OBJECT-GROUP
>>    OBJECTS {
>>        iscsiInstXNodeArchitecture,
>>        iscsiSsnTaskReporting,
>>        iscsiSsnProtocolLevel,
>>        iscsiSsnNopReceivedPDUs,
>>        iscsiSsnNopSentPDUs,
>>        iscsiIntrLastTgtFailurePort,
>>        iscsiTgtLastIntrFailurePort,
>>        iscsiPortalDescr,
>>        iscsiInstSsnTgtUnmappedErrors,
>>        iscsiTgtLogoutCxnClosed,
>>        iscsiTgtLogoutCxnRemoved
>>    }
>>    STATUS current
>>    DESCRIPTION
>>        "A collection of objects added in the second version of the
>>        iSCSI MIB."
>> --
>>    GROUP iscsiNewObjectsV2
>>    DESCRIPTION
>>        "This group is mandatory for all iSCSI implementations
>>        that support a value of the iSCSIProtocolLevel key of
>>        2 or greater."
>> --
>> When an implementation is upgraded to enable using the features of
>> iscsi-sam, it should start using the new MIB module as well. Until then,
>> the new objects are not required.
>> 
>> regards
>> Prakash
>> 
>> ________________________________________
>> From: Romascanu, Dan (Dan) [dromasca@avaya.com]
>> Sent: Wednesday, April 03, 2013 5:01 PM
>> To: Prakash Venkatesen, ERS-HCLTech; gen-art@ietf.org
>> Cc: mark_bakke@dell.com; david.black@emc.com; Martin Stiemerling;
>> storm@ietf.org
>> Subject: RE: Gen-ART Review of draft-ietf-storm-iscsimib-03.txt
>> 
>> Hi Prakash,
>> 
>> Thank you for addressing the issues raised in the Gen-ART review. The
>> changes made on issues 2 and 3 are fine, however, one clarification is
>> still needed regarding the first issue. See below (agreed stuff
>> deleted).
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Prakash Venkatesen, ERS-HCLTech [mailto:prakashvn@hcl.com]
>>> 
>>> Summary: Almost Ready
>>> 
>>> Major issues:
>>> 
>>> 1) This document will obsolete (when approved) RFC 4544, and add
>>> support for iSCSI protocol evolution according to the consolidated
>>> version of the iSCSI protocol (as per draft-ietf-storm-iscsi-cons) and
>>> for the updates to iSCSI (as per draft-ietf-storm-iscsi-sam) for
>> ProtocolLevel.
>>> There is no indication however in for the operators when an upgrade is
>>> recommended or becomes mandatory, and which version of the protocol is
>>> to be used during the transition, function of the iSCSI versions of
>>> the protocol.
>>> 
>>> Prakash> As per rough consensus of STORM group, the new features are
>>> required when implementation supports a value of the
>>> iSCSIProtocolLevel key of 2 or greater. The new draft has this change.
>>> 
>> 
>> [[DR]] 'the new features are required' means that the MIB support MUST
>> be updated accordingly when the iSCSI updates are deployed? In other
>> words, would an RFC 4544 - based implementation break, or it will
>> continue to work (with functional limitations) until the updated MIB
>> version is introduced?
>> 
>> Thanks and Regards,
>> 
>> Dan
>> 
>> 
>> ::DISCLAIMER::
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> ----
>> 
>> The contents of this e-mail and any attachment(s) are confidential and
>> intended for the named recipient(s) only.
>> E-mail transmission is not guaranteed to be secure or error-free as
>> information could be intercepted, corrupted, lost, destroyed, arrive
>> late or incomplete, or may contain viruses in transmission. The e mail
>> and its contents (with or without referred errors) shall therefore not
>> attach any liability on the originator or HCL or its affiliates.
>> Views or opinions, if any, presented in this email are solely those of
>> the author and may not necessarily reflect the views or opinions of HCL
>> or its affiliates. Any form of reproduction, dissemination, copying,
>> disclosure, modification, distribution and / or publication of this
>> message without the prior written consent of authorized representative
>> of HCL is strictly prohibited. If you have received this email in error
>> please delete it and notify the sender immediately.
>> Before opening any email and/or attachments, please check them for
>> viruses and other defects.
>> 
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> ----
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Gen-art mailing list
> Gen-art@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art