Re: [Ips] iSCSI-specific unit attention conditions
brown_David1@emc.com Tue, 31 March 2009 20:11 UTC
Return-Path: <brown_David1@emc.com>
X-Original-To: ips@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ips@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0F0CD3A69AE for <ips@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 31 Mar 2009 13:11:12 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id b96f5MfLNOEy for <ips@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 31 Mar 2009 13:11:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mexforward.lss.emc.com (mexforward.lss.emc.com [128.222.32.20]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F33993A6810 for <ips@ietf.org>; Tue, 31 Mar 2009 13:11:10 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from hop04-l1d11-si02.isus.emc.com (HOP04-L1D11-SI02.isus.emc.com [10.254.111.55]) by mexforward.lss.emc.com (Switch-3.2.5/Switch-3.1.7) with ESMTP id n2VKC7eL008612 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Tue, 31 Mar 2009 16:12:08 -0400 (EDT)
From: brown_David1@emc.com
Received: from mailhub.lss.emc.com (numailhub.lss.emc.com [10.254.144.15]) by hop04-l1d11-si02.isus.emc.com (Tablus Interceptor); Tue, 31 Mar 2009 16:12:04 -0400
Received: from corpussmtp4.corp.emc.com (corpussmtp4.corp.emc.com [10.254.64.54]) by mailhub.lss.emc.com (Switch-3.3.2mp/Switch-3.3.2mp) with ESMTP id n2VKC1ww003695; Tue, 31 Mar 2009 16:12:04 -0400
Received: from CORPUSMX60C.corp.emc.com ([10.254.64.72]) by corpussmtp4.corp.emc.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Tue, 31 Mar 2009 16:12:01 -0400
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Date: Tue, 31 Mar 2009 16:11:34 -0400
Message-ID: <11145F1B616CCD439BE1D34604A4AFEE39C889@CORPUSMX60C.corp.emc.com>
In-Reply-To: <18898.28621.87089.387064@gargle.gargle.HOWL>
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
Thread-Topic: [Ips] iSCSI-specific unit attention conditions
thread-index: AcmyN3muVtch7cfqQ4mDSuvM/lOx5QAA7X3A
References: <18898.26477.64898.577194@gargle.gargle.HOWL><AC32D7C72530234288643DD5F1435D530445C53C@RTPMVEXC1-PRD.hq.netapp.com> <18898.28621.87089.387064@gargle.gargle.HOWL>
To: Paul_Koning@dell.com, Frederick.Knight@netapp.com
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 31 Mar 2009 20:12:01.0303 (UTC) FILETIME=[F3B13A70:01C9B23C]
X-EMM-EM: Active
Cc: ips@ietf.org, Black_David@emc.com
Subject: Re: [Ips] iSCSI-specific unit attention conditions
X-BeenThere: ips@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: IP Storage <ips.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ips>, <mailto:ips-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ips>
List-Post: <mailto:ips@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ips-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ips>, <mailto:ips-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 31 Mar 2009 20:11:12 -0000
Maybe this is obvious to the T10 folks in the audience, but . . . Since these unit attentions use an ASC of 3F, they indicate a change to the operating state of the device. No commands are affected. From the concise wording of the 05-406 proposal, it's hard to be sure what the author intended, but it sounds to me like the target is telling the initiator about a change in the membership of the portal group. Might be caused by a configuration change, possibly by hot-plugging another network interface card into the target system. DJ Brown -----Original Message----- From: ips-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:ips-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Paul Koning Sent: Tuesday, March 31, 2009 3:32 PM To: Frederick.Knight@netapp.com Cc: ips@ietf.org; Black, David Subject: Re: [Ips] iSCSI-specific unit attention conditions >>>>> "Frederick" == Frederick Knight <Knight> writes: Frederick> My interpretation of the "update" part of the agenda was Frederick> that SAM-4 was an example (and that we should also include Frederick> SAM-3 and SAM-5 as part of the update list). Therefore, Frederick> to add SPC to the update list is (in my opinion) within Frederick> the scope for the SCSI Update portion of this project. Frederick> Yes, it should be included in the charter (either Frederick> specifically, or by making clear the broader Frederick> interpretation of the "update"). Ok, that sounds good. Frederick> There is no person advocating these ASC/Q codes. These Frederick> are ALREADY APPROVED ASC/Q codes, and the person that Frederick> caused them to become approved is no longer part of T10, Frederick> nor is that company a part of T10 at this time, so it will Frederick> be hard to find them and get them to do anything. Frederick> In my opinion, we should define their use, and let the Frederick> e-mail reviews make sure we get it right (or as good as we Frederick> can). Partly because, contrary to the statement below, Frederick> the causes of all unit attention conditions are not Frederick> "clearly defined". I was assuming the person doing the advocating would be the appropriate one to do the defining. If that person isn't around but someone else wants to do the defining, that is fine, too. Part of what bothers me is that I can't fathom what these codes are intended for, or what the scenarios are when they might be generated, or what conclusion an initiator is supposed to draw when it sees one. The names vaguely suggest that they have something to do with asynchronous logout, but that is already fully covered in the iSCSI spec. Itdoesn't require any unit attentions in the first place, certainly not any iSCSI specific ones. I would rather see these things go away, unless there is a good argument made that there is something missing in iSCSI that needs to be added, and these codes are part of the solution. The fact that T10 already approved them isn't a reason to add them to iSCSI. paul _______________________________________________ Ips mailing list Ips@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ips
- [Ips] iSCSI-specific unit attention conditions Black_David
- Re: [Ips] iSCSI-specific unit attention conditions Paul Koning
- Re: [Ips] iSCSI-specific unit attention conditions Black_David
- Re: [Ips] iSCSI-specific unit attention conditions Paul Koning
- Re: [Ips] iSCSI-specific unit attention conditions Paul Koning
- Re: [Ips] iSCSI-specific unit attention conditions brown_David1
- Re: [Ips] iSCSI-specific unit attention conditions Knight, Frederick
- Re: [Ips] iSCSI-specific unit attention conditions Knight, Frederick
- Re: [Ips] iSCSI-specific unit attention conditions dcuddihy
- Re: [Ips] iSCSI-specific unit attention conditions Paul Koning
- Re: [Ips] iSCSI-specific unit attention conditions Knight, Frederick
- Re: [Ips] iSCSI-specific unit attention conditions Kevin_Marks
- Re: [Ips] iSCSI-specific unit attention conditions Black_David
- Re: [Ips] iSCSI-specific unit attention conditions Bill Galloway
- Re: [Ips] iSCSI-specific unit attention conditions Julian Satran
- Re: [Ips] iSCSI-specific unit attention conditions Ralph Weber