Re: [storm] iSCSI Level and Version

Mallikarjun Chadalapaka <cbm@chadalapaka.com> Fri, 19 August 2011 00:39 UTC

Return-Path: <cbm@chadalapaka.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 4AA9421F85C6 for <storm@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 18 Aug 2011 17:39:04 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.408
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.408 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.191, BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id mhDdL2ZIbmKM for <storm@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 18 Aug 2011 17:39:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from snt0-omc1-s51.snt0.hotmail.com (snt0-omc1-s51.snt0.hotmail.com [65.54.61.88]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4739C21F85B9 for <storm@ietf.org>; Thu, 18 Aug 2011 17:39:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from SNT131-DS4 ([65.55.90.8]) by snt0-omc1-s51.snt0.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Thu, 18 Aug 2011 17:39:58 -0700
X-Originating-IP: [131.107.0.86]
X-Originating-Email: [cbm@chadalapaka.com]
Message-ID: <SNT131-ds46AA6D1C5DE940E7109B7A02A0@phx.gbl>
From: Mallikarjun Chadalapaka <cbm@chadalapaka.com>
To: "'Knight, Frederick'" <Frederick.Knight@netapp.com>, <storm@ietf.org>
References: <SNT131-ds1075B498B0A57BB28BD25AA0280@phx.gbl> <AC32D7C72530234288643DD5F1435D5310C4A997@RTPMVEXC1-PRD.hq.netapp.com>
In-Reply-To: <AC32D7C72530234288643DD5F1435D5310C4A997@RTPMVEXC1-PRD.hq.netapp.com>
Date: Thu, 18 Aug 2011 17:39:36 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0
Thread-Index: AQIGDQs4lOePtW6vA+go7jeBrB4F7AKLt1BRlJuXTbA=
Content-Language: en-us
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 19 Aug 2011 00:39:58.0585 (UTC) FILETIME=[85E24690:01CC5E08]
Subject: Re: [storm] iSCSI Level and Version
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: Fri, 19 Aug 2011 00:39:04 -0000

I agree with Fred.  I think we should mark the key as IO (Initialize-Only)
in terms of when it can be used.

As far as what the iSCSIProtocolLevel indicates though, it may communicate
changes in PDU format and/or end node semantics.  IOW, there is no reason to
limit this exclusively to signal PDU format changes.  Hope that makes sense.

Changing the format of the Login-related PDUs is an interesting question.  I
would think that Version number should be bumped up to cover that scenario.

Thanks.

Mallikarjun


  -----Original Message-----
  From: Knight, Frederick [mailto:Frederick.Knight@netapp.com]
  Sent: Tuesday, August 16, 2011 10:14 PM
  To: Mallikarjun Chadalapaka; storm@ietf.org
  Subject: RE: [storm] iSCSI Level and Version
  
  The new SAM features draft changes the format of some PDUs.
  
  The current Version-max/min/active are fields within a PDU.
  
  The iSCSIProtocolLevel tells the end points which format to use for the
  PDUs, so the end point can find the fields within the PDU.  This lets us
have
  different format PDUs AFTER the negotiation of this key.  The creation of
  the iSCSIProtocolLevel key allows us to write future drafts that make
  changes more radical than what the new SAM features draft contains.
  
  You need to know the iSCSIProtocolLevel to know which PDU format to use.
  So this makes me wonder, if we should move the negotiation of
  iSCSIProtocolLevel from the full feature phase to the login phase (should
the
  negotiation of iSCSIProtocolLevel come earlier)?  Might we ever want to
  change the format of any of the PDUs used during login?
  
  	Fred
  
  -----Original Message-----
  From: Mallikarjun Chadalapaka [mailto:cbm@chadalapaka.com]
  Sent: Tuesday, August 16, 2011 11:14 PM
  To: storm@ietf.org
  Subject: [storm] iSCSI Level and Version
  
  In doing an internal review of the iSCSI Last Call drafts, someone asked
me
  this.  I want to run this response by the larger WG to see if we're all in
  agreement.
  
  Question: What is the difference between Version-max/Version-
  min/Version-active values exchanged during the iSCSI Login phase, and the
  negotiated value of iSCSIProtocolLevel key?
  
  Answer: The V-* values agreed to during the Login process determine the
  operating version of the iSCSI protocol, and announce if any other
versions
  can be supported by either side.  The operational iSCSIProtocolLevel key
on
  the other hand determines the specific protocol features that may be used
  on an iSCSI session, within the "Version-active" versioned iSCSI protocol.
  
  If this sounds reasonable, it is worth capturing this clarification in the
  SAM-4 draft where this key is defined.
  
  Thanks.
  
  Mallikarjun
  
  
  
  _______________________________________________
  storm mailing list
  storm@ietf.org
  https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/storm