IETF Logo Mail Archive

[storm] iSER - one last issue

<david.black@emc.com> Mon, 16 January 2012 22:08 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 2175321F8690 for <storm@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 16 Jan 2012 14:08:49 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -106.579
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.579 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.018, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
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 KiBcnxh+P6z4 for <storm@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 16 Jan 2012 14:08:47 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mexforward.lss.emc.com (mexforward.lss.emc.com [128.222.32.20]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6C62421F868C for <storm@ietf.org>; Mon, 16 Jan 2012 14:08:44 -0800 (PST)
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 q0GM86kV009751 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Mon, 16 Jan 2012 17:08:13 -0500
Received: from mailhub.lss.emc.com (mailhub.lss.emc.com [10.254.221.145]) by hop04-l1d11-si01.isus.emc.com (RSA Interceptor); Mon, 16 Jan 2012 17:07:55 -0500
Received: from mxhub11.corp.emc.com (mxhub11.corp.emc.com [10.254.92.106]) by mailhub.lss.emc.com (Switch-3.4.3/Switch-3.4.3) with ESMTP id q0GM4KKg029637; Mon, 16 Jan 2012 17:07:55 -0500
Received: from mx14a.corp.emc.com ([169.254.1.99]) by mxhub11.corp.emc.com ([10.254.92.106]) with mapi; Mon, 16 Jan 2012 17:06:24 -0500
From: david.black@emc.com
To: Michael@huaweisymantec.com, storm@ietf.org
Importance: high
X-Priority: 1
Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2012 17:06:23 -0500
Thread-Topic: iSER - one last issue
Thread-Index: AczTi8dTUnGPifc7Qzm0rCKaRKGZdgBDXxGA
Message-ID: <7C4DFCE962635144B8FAE8CA11D0BF1E05A7CF06E5@MX14A.corp.emc.com>
References: <20120115134011.27535.67315.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <BA395993A32345F6898D0CD255E01020@china.huawei.com>
In-Reply-To: <BA395993A32345F6898D0CD255E01020@china.huawei.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
acceptlanguage: en-US
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_7C4DFCE962635144B8FAE8CA11D0BF1E05A7CF06E5MX14Acorpemcc_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-EMM-MHVC: 1
Subject: [storm] iSER - one last issue
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: Mon, 16 Jan 2012 22:08:49 -0000

Mike,

Thanks for getting the -08 version of the iSER draft posted.  I think that
draft addresses all of the open issues, but I have a question for the WG
about how to express the SendSE and SendInvSE requirements from RFC 5046.

The -08 version of the iSER draft expresses requirements for the SendSE
and SendInvSE messages (this is primarily for iSER over RDDP/iWARP) as:

The SendSE Message should be used if
supported by the RCaP layer (e.g., iWARP).

My reading of RFC 5046 is that its requirements are tighter - to accurately
reflect RFC 5046, I would replace "should" with "MUST" in the above text,
at least for iWARP.

In the alternative, if the "should"s remain, an explanatory item
needs to be added to the Appendix A list of changes from RFC 5046.

What do others think the right course of action is here, use "MUST" or
explain weakening of requirement to "should" ?

Thanks,
--David

From: storm-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:storm-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Michael Ko
Sent: Sunday, January 15, 2012 8:43 AM
To: storm@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [storm] I-D Action: draft-ietf-storm-iser-08.txt

This version contains all the updates as discussed in the latest exchanges with Hemal Shah and David Black.

Mike
----- Original Message -----
From: internet-drafts@ietf.org<mailto:internet-drafts@ietf.org>
To: i-d-announce@ietf.org<mailto:i-d-announce@ietf.org>
Cc: storm@ietf.org<mailto:storm@ietf.org>
Sent: Sunday, January 15, 2012 5:40 AM
Subject: [storm] I-D Action: draft-ietf-storm-iser-08.txt


A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the STORage Maintenance Working Group of the IETF.

Title           : iSCSI Extensions for RDMA Specification
Author(s)       : Michael Ko
                          Alexander Nezhinsky
Filename        : draft-ietf-storm-iser-08.txt
Pages           : 95
Date            : 2012-01-15

   iSCSI Extensions for RDMA provides the RDMA data transfer capability
   to iSCSI by layering iSCSI on top of an RDMA-Capable Protocol.  An
   RDMA-Capable Protocol provides RDMA Read and Write services, which
   enable data to be transferred directly into SCSI I/O Buffers without
   intermediate data copies.  This document describes the extensions to
   the iSCSI protocol to support RDMA services as provided by an RDMA-
   Capable Protocol.

   This document obsoletes RFC 5046.


A URL for this Internet-Draft is:
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-storm-iser-08.txt

Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at:
ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/

This Internet-Draft can be retrieved at:
ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-storm-iser-08.txt

_______________________________________________
storm mailing list
storm@ietf.org<mailto:storm@ietf.org>
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/storm

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email