SORT BY:

LIST ORDER
THREAD
AUTHOR
SUBJECT


SEARCH

IPS HOME


    [Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

    iSCSI: LUs ownership/iSCSI MIB


    • To: ips@ece.cmu.edu
    • Subject: iSCSI: LUs ownership/iSCSI MIB
    • From: Pierre Labat <pierre_labat@hp.com>
    • Date: Fri, 23 Mar 2001 10:34:56 -0800
    • Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
    • Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
    • Organization: Hewlett Packard ATM-SISL
    • Sender: owner-ips@ece.cmu.edu

    Mark (bakke),
    
    
    Where
    =====
    In the MIB draft, in the chapter
    
    5.1.  Overall MIB structure
    
    
    There is:
    
    "Therefore, LUs are "owned" by Targets, and LUNs are owned
       by Sessions."
    
    Problem
    ======
    
    If a LU is owned by only one target how do you deal with an
    active-passive
    configuration such as:
    active link: portal IP1, LUN=1
    passive: portal IP2, LUN=2 (but it is the same LU as the one accessed
    through the active link)
    
    As the various portals of a target provide the same LUN view, IP1 and
    IP2 can NOT
    be two portals of the same target.
    
    In this case we would need two target names, one for the active link and
    one for the passive.
    
    But if a LU can be owned by only one target we can't do it.
    I think SAM doesn't allows a LU to be shared by two targets and that
    seems
    to be reflected in the chapter "5.1.  Overall MIB structure".
    
    Solution
    ======
    In the case of an active-passive configuration, the target must
    guarantee the same
    view on the two paths (active and passive).
    Is it a problem for whose who build such targets?
    
    
    Regards,
    
    Pierre
    
    
    
    
    


Home

Last updated: Tue Sep 04 01:05:16 2001
6315 messages in chronological order