Re: iSCSI-specific unit attention conditions
Paul,
> I am somewhat puzzled by the notion of T10 defining iSCSI things.
> Did these things receive any discussion on the IPS list? If not,
> shouldn't that happen first?
Not to my knowledge, and (IMHO) yes. The proposer of these ASC/Qs
to T10 appears to have dropped the ball in that regard.
In T10's defense, they do try to be accommodating, as there are SCSI
transport-related conditions and errors that can only realistically
be made visible as SCSI errors or unit attentions.
> It seems to me that IPS should ask T10 for iSCSI related changes,
> not The other way around. And nothing should be added without a
> description of how it is supposed to be used.
I agree that this is how it should work, but these ASC/Qs seem to
have slipped by and now need to be cleaned up one way or another.
FWIW, there's one more iSCSI-specific ASC/Q:
47h 7Fh SOME COMMANDS CLEARED BY ISCSI PROTOCOL EVENT
This ASC/Q was added to deal with task side effects of some iSCSI
error handling; use of this ASC/Q is documented in Sections 6.5
and 10.14.5 of RFC 3720.
Thanks,
--David
----------------------------------------------------
David L. Black, Distinguished Engineer
EMC Corporation, 176 South St., Hopkinton, MA 01748
+1 (508) 293-7953 FAX: +1 (508) 293-7786
black_david@xxxxxxx Mobile: +1 (978) 394-7754
----------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Ips mailing list
Ips@xxxxxxxx
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ips
[IETF]
[Linux iSCSI]
[Linux SCSI]
[Linux Resources]
[Yosemite News]
[IETF Announcements]
[IETF Discussion]
[SCSI]