[storm] SPC-2 reserve/release: Proposed text

"Black, David" <david.black@emc.com> Tue, 25 September 2012 15:44 UTC

Return-Path: <david.black@emc.com>
X-Original-To: storm@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: storm@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2127421F86AD for <storm@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 25 Sep 2012 08:44:52 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id FTkTMFbjn5mu for <storm@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 25 Sep 2012 08:44:51 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mexforward.lss.emc.com (hop-nat-141.emc.com [168.159.213.141]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 60FDF21F87D3 for <storm@ietf.org>; Tue, 25 Sep 2012 08:44:51 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from hop04-l1d11-si01.isus.emc.com (HOP04-L1D11-SI01.isus.emc.com [10.254.111.54]) by mexforward.lss.emc.com (Switch-3.4.3/Switch-3.4.3) with ESMTP id q8PFinDg026504 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for <storm@ietf.org>; Tue, 25 Sep 2012 11:44:49 -0400
Received: from mailhub.lss.emc.com (mailhubhoprd03.lss.emc.com [10.254.221.145]) by hop04-l1d11-si01.isus.emc.com (RSA Interceptor) for <storm@ietf.org>; Tue, 25 Sep 2012 11:44:34 -0400
Received: from mxhub15.corp.emc.com (mxhub15.corp.emc.com [128.222.70.236]) by mailhub.lss.emc.com (Switch-3.4.3/Switch-3.4.3) with ESMTP id q8PFiYvv021948 for <storm@ietf.org>; Tue, 25 Sep 2012 11:44:34 -0400
Received: from mx15a.corp.emc.com ([169.254.1.83]) by mxhub15.corp.emc.com ([128.222.70.236]) with mapi; Tue, 25 Sep 2012 11:44:34 -0400
From: "Black, David" <david.black@emc.com>
To: "storm@ietf.org" <storm@ietf.org>
Date: Tue, 25 Sep 2012 11:44:32 -0400
Thread-Topic: SPC-2 reserve/release: Proposed text
Thread-Index: Ac2bNKguGPJW+zTbTTC2uDGdWEV2OA==
Message-ID: <8D3D17ACE214DC429325B2B98F3AE7120DE7946D@MX15A.corp.emc.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
acceptlanguage: en-US
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-EMM-MHVC: 1
Subject: [storm] SPC-2 reserve/release: Proposed text
X-BeenThere: storm@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Storage Maintenance WG <storm.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/storm>, <mailto:storm-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/storm>
List-Post: <mailto:storm@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:storm-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/storm>, <mailto:storm-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 25 Sep 2012 15:44:52 -0000

<WG chair hat off>

Here's an initial attempt to propose text to deal with the reserve/
release topic in the consolidated iSCSI draft.  Please comment,
correct, suggest edits, etc.

The new text would be a new section 4.4.3.2 that would follow 4.4.3.1:

4.4.3.1. I_T Nexus State

  Certain nexus relationships contain an explicit state (e.g.,
  initiator-specific mode pages) that may need to be preserved by
  the device server [SAM2] in a logical unit through changes or
  failures in the iSCSI layer (e.g., session failures). In order for
  that state to be restored, the iSCSI initiator should reestablish
  its session (re-login) to the same Target Portal Group using the
  previous ISID. That is, it should perform session recovery as
  described in Chapter 6. This is because the SCSI initiator port
  identifier and the SCSI target port identifier (or relative target
  port) form the datum that the SCSI logical unit device server uses
  to identify the I_T nexus.

-------------------------------

First, for clarity, the following change should be made in the
above 4.4.3.1 text to better identify the recovery mechanism:

OLD
  That is, it should perform session recovery as
  described in Chapter 6.
NEW
  That is, it should recover the session via connection
  reinstatement as described in Section 6.3.4.
END

I believe that a lower-case "should" remains appropriate for this text.

-----------------------------------

NEW TEXT (first draft):

4.4.3.2. I_T Nexus State: Reservations

  The state of an I_T Nexus includes SCSI reservation state.  There
  are two reservation management methods defined in the SCSI standards,
  reserve/release reservations, based on the RESERVE and RELEASE
  commands [SPC2], and persistent reservations, based on the PERSISTENT
  RESERVE IN and PERSISTENT RESERVE OUT commands [SPC3].

  Reserve/release reservations are obsolete [SPC3] and SHOULD NOT be
  used; persistent reservations SHOULD be used instead.  The I_T Nexus
  state for persistent reservations is generally required to persist
  through changes and failures at the iSCSI layer that result in I_T
  Nexus failures, see [SPC3] for details and specific requirements.

  In contrast, [SPC2] does not specify detailed persistence
  requirements for reserve/release reservation state - nonetheless,
  when reserve/release reservations are supported by an iSCSI target,
  the preferred implementation approach is to preserve reserve/release
  reservation state along with other I_T Nexus state for iSCSI session
  recovery or continuation via connection reinstatement.

  Two additional caveats apply to reserve/release reservations:

  - Retention of reserve/release reservation state for an extended
	period of time may require a hard reset (e.g., LOGICAL UNIT RESET,
      see section 11.5) in order to remove that state when connection
      reinstatement is not performed.  The DefaultTime2Wait value
      can be used to limit this retention time period (see section 13.15).

  - Reserve/release reservations may not behave as expected when
      persistent reservations are also used on the same logical unit;
      see the discussion of "Exceptions to SPC-2 RESERVE and RELEASE
      behavior" in [SPC4].

-----------------------

Reference impacts: both [SPC2] and [SPC3] need to be normative
references, but [SPC4] can be an informative reference.

-------------------------

I deliberately used "the preferred iSCSI implementation approach"
wording for reserve/release reservation state preservation requirements,
as SPC-2 is vague on this topic and I'm rather uncomfortable with placing
a requirement as strong as a "SHOULD" on an obsolete mechanism that
"SHOULD NOT" be used.

Thanks,
--David
----------------------------------------------------
David L. Black, Distinguished Engineer
EMC Corporation, 176 South St., Hopkinton, MA  01748
+1 (508) 293-7953              FAX: +1 (508) 293-7786
david.black@emc.com        Mobile: +1 (978) 394-7754
----------------------------------------------------