RE: Unsupported target LUN

["Mallikarjun C." <cbm@rose.hp.com>]

Shawn is right.  So to answer Rick's original question,
the SCSI Status for illegal LUN CHECK CONDITION should be 
qualified by the iSCSI response code of "0x00" - "Command 
Completed at Target".
--
Mallikarjun 


Mallikarjun Chadalapaka
Networked Storage Architecture
Network Storage Solutions Organization
MS 5668	Hewlett-Packard, Roseville.
cbm@rose.hp.com


>From: "ERICKSON,SHAWN (HP-Roseville,ex1)" <shawn_erickson@hp.com>
>To: "'David Lee'" <David.Lee@vicom.com>, "'Rick Ellis'" <rellis@integrix.com>,
>        ips@ece.cmu.edu
>Subject: RE: Unsupported target LUN 
>Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2001 18:39:46 -0700
>MIME-Version: 1.0
>X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
>Content-Type: text/plain;
>	charset="iso-8859-1"
>Sender: owner-ips@ece.cmu.edu
>Precedence: bulk
>Status: RO
>
>The way things are currently defined for iSCSI (as most other SCSI
>"transports") it doesn't really care about LUNs. iSCSI has fields to
>transport the information regarding LUNs that matches with the SCSI protocol
>but that is about where it ends.
>
>LUN handling is up the SCSI protocol.
>
>One could argue to have LUN discovery lifted up to iSCSI for "easy of use"
>but I think the line should be drawn at that.
>
>-Shawn
>
>-------------------------------------------------------
> Shawn Carl Erickson           (805) 883-4319 [Telnet]
> Hewlett Packard Company         OV NSSO Joint Venture
>  Storage Resource Management R&D Lab (Santa Barbara)
>-------------------------------------------------------
>            <http://ecardfile.com/id/shawnce>
>-------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: David Lee [mailto:David.Lee@vicom.com]
>> Sent: Friday, July 27, 2001 5:13 PM
>> To: 'Rick Ellis'; ips@ece.cmu.edu
>> Subject: RE: Unsupported target LUN 
>> 
>> 
>> Rick,
>> 
>> I would prefer not to see an iSCSI response at all, but 
>> rather a SCSI Check
>> Condition status with appropriate Sense Data.
>> 
>> David Lee
>> Vicom Systems, Inc.
>> 47821 Bayside Parkway
>> Fremont, CA  94538
>> Phone: (510) 743-1162
>> Fax: (510) 743-1131
>> Email: david.lee@vicom.com
>> 
>> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Rick Ellis [mailto:rellis@integrix.com]
>> Sent: Friday, July 27, 2001 4:13 PM
>> To: ips@ece.cmu.edu
>> Subject: Unsupported target LUN 
>> 
>> 
>> What response code should be sent from the target for a LUN
>> that isn't valid?  Would "target failure" suffice?
>>