SORT BY:

LIST ORDER
THREAD
AUTHOR
SUBJECT


SEARCH

IPS HOME


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

    RE: SLP, iSNS, and iSCSI



    David,
    
    > I believe I was also a source of requests to do this, and the
    > courtesy is appreciated.  I think it's now up to the WG to decide
    > what FCIP discovery/configuration mechanisms to REQUIRE
    > and/or RECOMMEND in the FCIP draft.
    
    Thank you for your explanation, and I agree that it is
    a WG issue now.
    
    Regards,
    Josh
    
    > -----Original Message-----
    > From: Black_David@emc.com [mailto:Black_David@emc.com]
    > Sent: Thursday, May 24, 2001 1:29 PM
    > To: jtseng@NishanSystems.com; ips@ece.cmu.edu
    > Subject: RE: SLP, iSNS, and iSCSI
    > 
    > 
    > Josh,
    > 
    > > I'm not a DHCP expert, but in my limited understanding
    > > of the protocol, the DHCP server is not intelligent
    > > about who is asking for IP addresses and options.
    > > There is nothing to identify or authenticate a DHCP
    > > client making a request (other than the MAC), since it
    > > doesn't even have an IP address, not to mention an FQDN
    > > or any other identity.
    > 
    > I'm not a DHCP expert either, so we may need to go find one.
    > The following is what I currently understand ...
    > 
    > I agree with the concern about the scenario in which the
    > DHCP server is dynamically allocating IP addresses ...
    > 
    > > If this is true, I am puzzled as to how you can use
    > > DHCP to manage SLP scopes.  The DHCP server can't say
    > > "device A gets scopes X, Y, and Z", since it doesn't
    > > even know who device A is.  All it can do is hand out
    > > the same set of scopes to everyone requesting option 79.
    > > And that's all.  So how can you configure a complex set
    > > of overlapping scopes using a DHCP server???
    > 
    > There are at least two existing answers to that question,
    > both of which involve doing something different to assign
    > IP addresses:
    > 
    > (1) Manual Allocation.  From Section 1 of RFC 2131:
    > 
    >    In "manual allocation", a client's IP
    >    address is assigned by the network administrator, and DHCP
    >    is used simply to convey the assigned address to the client. 
    > 
    > In other words, the client's IP address is bound to its MAC,
    > and possibly additional information, such as the subnet on
    > which that MAC is presented if a DHCP proxy is involved.
    > A DHCP proxy gets around DHCP's use of link-level broadcasts
    > that don't propagate through layer 3 (IP) forwarding by proxying
    > the node issuing the broadcast to the DHCP server.  The
    > DHCP server can see the proxy identity, and hence knows
    > which subnet is involved.
    > 
    > (2) DHCP can be used to distribute configuration information
    > without doing any IP address allocation.  This is described
    > starting in Section 3.4 of RFC 2131, and uses a different
    > DHCP message from the one used to request IP address
    > allocation. In particular, a DHCP sever receiving such a
    > message  "MUST NOT check for an existing lease"
    > (on the IP address).
    > 
    > Even in the dynamic allocation scenario, knowledge of the
    > subnet/proxy involved may be enough for the DHCP
    > server to figure out what the right config parameters
    > are (e.g., all FCIP devices on the same subnet may be in
    > the same SLP scope(s), i.e., intended to connect to the
    > same set of FCIP peers).
    > 
    > > Lastly, I want to make sure everyone understands that
    > > support for FCIP is included in the iSNS out of courtesy
    > > to the FCIP community, and after close consultation with
    > > several key individuals from that community.  Since we
    > > are not implementing FCIP, I personally am neutral on
    > > whether it should be used for FCIP, although I do
    > > believe it would be of great value.
    > 
    > I believe I was also a source of requests to do this, and the
    > courtesy is appreciated.  I think it's now up to the WG to decide
    > what FCIP discovery/configuration mechanisms to REQUIRE
    > and/or RECOMMEND in the FCIP draft.
    > 
    > Thanks,
    > --David
    > 
    > ---------------------------------------------------
    > David L. Black, Senior Technologist
    > EMC Corporation, 42 South St., Hopkinton, MA  01748
    > +1 (508) 435-1000 x75140     FAX: +1 (508) 497-8500
    > black_david@emc.com       Mobile: +1 (978) 394-7754
    > ---------------------------------------------------
    > 
    


Home

Last updated: Tue Sep 04 01:04:37 2001
6315 messages in chronological order