[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
  Web www.spinics.net

Re: no DHCP-assigned InitiatorName

My 2 cents based on my understanding of iSNS. 

- iSNS clients (initiators and targets) need to have an IQN address
before they register with the iSNS server.
- Most pre-OS iSCSI initiators available today are not iSNS clients i.e.
they don't register with and/or query iSNS server.

Given this, it seems better to have a DHCP based standardized mechanism
for acquiring the initiator IQN. Based on initial email from Michael,
most pre-OS iSCSI Initiators available today have the capability to be a
DHCP client.

Gaurav Chawla
Technology Strategist, Network Storage Architecture | Office of the CTO,
Dell, Inc.
Phone: 512.724.4064 (work)

-----Original Message-----
From: ips-bounces@xxxxxxxx [mailto:ips-bounces@xxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of
Michael Howard
Sent: Monday, September 22, 2008 2:29 PM
To: Iyer, Shyam
Cc: SIVANT@xxxxxxxxxx; psarkar@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; ips@xxxxxxxx;
Subject: Re:  no DHCP-assigned InitiatorName

Shyam_Iyer@xxxxxxxx wrote:
> My 2cents on the issue. Please correct me if I am wrong. 

Thank you for participating in this discussion.

> Shouldn't it be possible to configure the isns server with a set of
> possibly regex rules for the control path. If this not possible today,
> then it could possibly be the root to take towards standardizing. 

I am not familiar enough with iSNS to comment.

I have been exposed to about about a dozen commercial environments with 
some level of iSCSI use/experimentation. I am not aware that any of them

  were running iSNS servers.

> This can solve the problem of provisioning for dynamic boot
> with minimum changes to legacy iqn implementations, many of which
> need to relearn to the new iqn mechanism that might end up as a result
> of this discussion.

Frankly, my concern is that Broadcom/IBM already have a non-standard 
DHCP Vendor Option work-around for this problem.

Adding a new/standardized InitiatorName DHCP option would not break 
existing initiator implementations. Vendors would integrate support for 
this new InitiatorName option into their code/firmware releases over

> Instead of changing numerous configurations we could
> simply change the isns server control mechanism.

I need to do some homework regarding iSNS.

> Comments?

iSCSI is still a very small part of the market.

I advocate addressing this deficiency sooner rather than later.

Ips mailing list
Ips mailing list

[IETF]     [Linux iSCSI]     [Linux SCSI]     [Linux Resources]     [Yosemite News]     [IETF Announcements]     [IETF Discussion]     [SCSI]

Add to Google Powered by Linux