RE: [Gen-art] RE: Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-ips-scsi-mib-08
Black_David@emc.com Tue, 17 January 2006 17:47 UTC
Received: from localhost.cnri.reston.va.us ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1Eyuv7-0005Rk-3s; Tue, 17 Jan 2006 12:47:01 -0500
Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1Eyuv3-0005Qt-Pc; Tue, 17 Jan 2006 12:46:58 -0500
Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA04269; Tue, 17 Jan 2006 12:45:32 -0500 (EST)
From: Black_David@emc.com
Received: from mexforward.lss.emc.com ([168.159.213.200]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Eyv3E-0000SP-Cn; Tue, 17 Jan 2006 12:55:24 -0500
Received: from mailhub.lss.emc.com (nirah.lss.emc.com [10.254.144.13]) by mexforward.lss.emc.com (Switch-3.1.0/Switch-3.1.7) with ESMTP id k0HHkXD4000974; Tue, 17 Jan 2006 12:46:33 -0500 (EST)
Received: from mxic2.corp.emc.com (mxic2.corp.emc.com [128.221.12.9]) by mailhub.lss.emc.com (Switch-3.1.6/Switch-3.1.7) with ESMTP id k0HHkD8H029381; Tue, 17 Jan 2006 12:46:19 -0500 (EST)
Received: by mxic2.corp.emc.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id <ZJ2GB6NM>; Tue, 17 Jan 2006 12:40:33 -0500
Message-ID: <F222151D3323874393F83102D614E055013E906F@CORPUSMX20A.corp.emc.com>
To: harald@alvestrand.no, gen-art@ietf.org
Subject: RE: [Gen-art] RE: Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-ips-scsi-mib-08
Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 12:40:28 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
Content-Type: text/plain
X-PMX-Version: 4.7.1.128075, Antispam-Engine: 2.1.0.0, Antispam-Data: 2006.01.17.085105
X-PerlMx-Spam: Gauge=, SPAM=0%, Reasons='EMC_BODY_1+ -5, EMC_FROM_00+ -3, IP_HTTP_ADDR 0, NO_REAL_NAME 0, __C230066_P5 0, __CT 0, __CT_TEXT_PLAIN 0, __HAS_MSGID 0, __HAS_X_MAILER 0, __IMS_MSGID 0, __IMS_MUA 0, __MIME_TEXT_ONLY 0, __MIME_VERSION 0, __SANE_MSGID 0, __STOCK_CRUFT 0'
X-Spam-Score: 0.3 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: bdc523f9a54890b8a30dd6fd53d5d024
Cc: mbakke@cisco.com, marjorie_krueger@hp.com, mankin@psg.com, yaronled@bezeqint.net, ips@ietf.org, michele@sanrad.com, kzm@cisco.com, Black_David@emc.com
X-BeenThere: gen-art@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: "GEN-ART: General Area Review Team" <gen-art.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art>, <mailto:gen-art-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/gen-art>
List-Post: <mailto:gen-art@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gen-art-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art>, <mailto:gen-art-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: gen-art-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: gen-art-bounces@ietf.org
Harald, Ok, there's some text in Section 7.5 that's already headed in that direction, so we'll see about writing a "MUST implement" requirement for the Counter64 items based on interface speed. Thanks, --David ---------------------------------------------------- David L. Black, Senior Technologist EMC Corporation, 176 South St., Hopkinton, MA 01748 +1 (508) 293-7953 FAX: +1 (508) 293-7786 black_david@emc.com Mobile: +1 (978) 394-7754 ---------------------------------------------------- > -----Original Message----- > From: gen-art-bounces@ietf.org > [mailto:gen-art-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Harald Tveit Alvestrand > Sent: Tuesday, January 17, 2006 11:17 AM > To: Black, David; gen-art@ietf.org > Cc: mbakke@cisco.com; marjorie_krueger@hp.com; > mankin@psg.com; yaronled@bezeqint.net; ips@ietf.org; > michele@sanrad.com; kzm@cisco.com > Subject: [Gen-art] RE: Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-ips-scsi-mib-08 > > Thanks for the quick feedback, David! > > I'm happy to leave this in your hands - one comment only: > > --On tirsdag, januar 17, 2006 11:02:36 -0500 > Black_David@emc.com wrote: > > >> The term "running at high speed" is a gating criterion for whether or > >> not the HS counters are mandatory, but I can't see that it's defined in > >> a testable way. Might have missed it - it would logically seem to > >> belong in section 7.5. > > > > Unfortunately, it's fuzzy and not testable in all cases. Here's what > > RFC 4181 (Section 4.6.1.2) has to say about this issue: > > > > Henceforth "standard" MIB modules MAY > > use the Counter64 type when it makes sense to do so, and MUST use > > Counter64 if the information being modelled would wrap in less than > > one hour if the Counter32 type was used instead. > > > > It clearly "makes sense" to use the Counter64 type, as there are SCSI > > implementations that clearly need it based on the "would wrap in less > > than one hour" criterion. Would adapting the quoted RFC 4181 text > > (with a reference to RFC 4181) be sufficient to satisfy your concern? > > What I'd like to see is something that makes it a complete no-brainer > whether or not the HC counters are needed, for instance: > > If the interconnect speed is higher than 4 Gbits/second, the HC counters > MUST be implemented, since that makes it possible to spin the counters > in one hour (see [RFC4181]). > > I wouldn't like someone to say "but... my implementation has a 10G > interface, but it's so badly implemented that I can't possibly get more > than 1 million operations per second through it, so I don't need to > implement the HC counters, do I?" > > (4G is picked out of thin air, but illustrates the problem... if The Number > is 3G, then 4G FC needs to implement it; if The Number is 9G, then only > people with 10GE and Infiniband interfaces need bother...) > > But you know this stuff, I don't.... > > Harald > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Gen-art mailing list > Gen-art@ietf.org > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art > _______________________________________________ Gen-art mailing list Gen-art@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art
- [Gen-art] Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-ips-scsi-m… Harald Tveit Alvestrand
- [Gen-art] RE: Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-ips-sc… Black_David
- [Gen-art] RE: Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-ips-sc… Harald Tveit Alvestrand
- RE: [Gen-art] RE: Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-ip… Black_David