Re: SCSI MIB design team formation

["Sanjeev Bhagat" <iscsi_t10@sanjeevbhagat.com>]

hello all,

i am already studying the stuff. i was suppose to be in the t-10 meeting
but my plane returned back from half way because of problems in USA. i have
just reurned home.

meanwhile i have done quiet some studies and i would be able to put
something in written after about 15 days. I have started to feel a little on
SNMP stuff, but i am reading SMI and MIB these days.

sanjeev


----- Original Message -----
From: "Elizabeth Rodriguez" <egrodriguez@lucent.com>
To: "Elizabeth Rodriguez" <Elizabeth.Rodriguez@nc8220exch1.ral.lucent.com>;
<ips@ece.cmu.edu>
Cc: "David Black (E-mail)" <black_david@emc.com>; "Keith McCloghrie
(E-mail)" <kzm@cisco.com>; <sbhagat@tripace.com>; <rkroberts@aol.com>
Sent: Tuesday, September 11, 2001 8:37 PM
Subject: RE: SCSI MIB design team formation


> Hello all,
>
> We have received input from many individuals willing to help out on this
> effort/design team.
>
> David, Keith and I will review the information we have received and
> announce the team formation.  Target for this announcement will be on
> Monday, Sept 17.
>
> Thanks to all who have volunteered.
>
> Elizabeth
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Elizabeth Rodriguez
> Sent: Monday, September 03, 2001 11:42 PM
> To: ips@ece.cmu.edu
> Cc: David Black (E-mail); Keith McCloghrie (E-mail);
> sbhagat@tripace.com; rkroberts@aol.com
> Subject: SCSI MIB design team formation
>
>
> Hello all,
>
> I believe that the IPS WG is now prepared to undertake the effort of
> development of a SCSI MIB.
> As mentioned below by Marjorie, while the iSCSI MIB design team is
> willing to contribute to this development,
> the effort needs to be undertaken by a different group of people.
>
> T10 CAP is also willing to contribute, but the T10 organization will not
> undertake the MIB development itself.
> That will be a draft undertaken by the IPS working group.
>
> We now have 2 individuals who are willing to undertake the SCSI MIB
> development.
> The first is Sanjeev Bhagat, of Tripace.
> The second is Ron Roberts, of Adaptec.
> Both are experienced in both SCSI and MIB work, and are willing to
> undertake this effort.
>
> Keith McCloghrie will assist this group in his capacity as MIB advisor.
>
> Anyone else who is willing to contribute to this effort should contact
> David or myself, by Sept 10.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Elizabeth Rodriguez & David Black
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: KRUEGER,MARJORIE (HP-Roseville,ex1)
> [mailto:marjorie_krueger@hp.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, August 29, 2001 4:49 PM
> To: 'Michele Hallak - Stamler'; mbakke@cisco.com
> Cc: ips@ece.cmu.edu
> Subject: iSCSI: state of a SCSI MIB (was RE: ISCSI: A propos MIB and
> specially iSCSI MIB)
>
>
> Regarding your question on the state of a SCSI MIB, we are looking for a
> MIB
> designer that is SCSI aware to head this effort, as Mark and I have too
> many
> other committments.  The iSCSI MIB design team will contribute to the
> basis
> for a SCSI MIB, but we are still looking for a leader in the SCSI MIB
> effort.  We have taken this issue to the T10 CAP group to solicite help,
> but
> the MIB must ultimately be submitted as an IETF draft.  Hopefully, this
> effort will take shape soon.
>
> Marjorie Krueger
> Networked Storage Architecture
> Networked Storage Solutions Org.
> Hewlett-Packard
> tel: +1 916 785 2656
> fax: +1 916 785 0391
> email: marjorie_krueger@hp.com
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Michele Hallak - Stamler [mailto:michele@sanrad.com]
> > Sent: Tuesday, August 28, 2001 9:20 AM
> > To: mbakke@cisco.com
> > Cc: ips@ece.cmu.edu
> > Subject: RE: ISCSI: A propos MIB and specially iSCSI MIB
> >
> >
> > Mark,
> > Thanks a lot for your prompt answer...
> > My comments are prefixed by MHS.
> > Thanks again,
> > Michele
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Mark Bakke [mailto:mbakke@cisco.com]
> > > Sent: Monday, August 27, 2001 3:47 PM
> > > To: Michele Hallak - Stamler
> > > Cc: ips@ece.cmu.edu
> > > Subject: Re: ISCSI: A propos MIB and specially iSCSI MIB
> > >
> > >
> > > Michele-
> > >
> > > Thanks for the comments.  My comments are below.
> > >
> > > --
> > > Mark
> > >
> > > Michele Hallak - Stamler wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Since you are meeting at interim meetings on MIBs:
> > > >
> > > > The following mail summarizes my suggestions concerning the
> > > improvement
> > > > of iSCSI MIB:
> > > >
> > > > 1. New Textual Convention:
> > > >  AuthenticationMethodTC  ::= TEXTUAL-CONVENTION
> > > >     STATUS current
> > > >     DESCRIPTION
> > > >         "List of possible authentication methods."
> > > >     SYNTAX INTEGER {
> > > >                 none(1),
> > > >                 crc32(2),
> > > >                 crc64(3),
> > > >                 md5(4),
> > > >                 kerberosMd5(5),
> > > >                 kerberosMd5des(6),
> > > >                 kerberosMd5desHmark(7)
> > > >         }
> > >
> > > This is a text field in the current MIB; it will change to
> > > an OID field in the next version, which acts a little like
> > > your enumerated types, but is extensible without modifying
> > > the MIB.  BTW, this is a set of two attributes called DataDigest
> > > and HeaderDigest; AuthMethod is something completely different.
> > > All of the digest methods will be removed from draft-08 with
> > > the exception of "none" and "crc-32c".  With the new OID scheme;
> > > values for these can be added to your enterprise MIB if you
> > > choose to implement them.
> > >
> > [MHS]  If it will be OIDs, it's fine with me. I was
> > inconfortable with simple strings.
> > > >
> > > > 2. Add RowStatus and Read-Write Access to the portals and to the
> > > > authorized list of initiators.
> > >
> > > Which attributes to write and which rows to delete are currently
> > > under consideration.  We are looking for detailed input on this.
> > >
> > > Please send the list of attributes you wish to write, and why
> > > you wish to write them.
> > [MHS]  Mainly, we would like to add the type of access for each
> > initiator: read-only or read-write.
> >
> > > > 3. Add RowStatus to iscsiTargetAttributesTable in order
> > to allow an
> > > > administrator to create target and
> > > > set the access of the fields:     iscsiTgtName  and
> > iscsiTgtAlias as
> > > > read-create
> > >
> > > It's not possible to create an iSCSI target without first creating
> > > a SCSI target.  I don't think we will be ready to explore this until
> > > we have made progress on a SCSI MIB.  If you have some ideas on how
> > > a management station would make use of this (with both
> > MIBs) to create
> > > new targets, please send them.
> > >
> > [MHS]  After having made some clarifications, I understand what
> > you mean now.
> > What is the status of the SCSI MIB? Is there any work done on
> > the matter?
> > And at which organization?
> > For our management we need the ability to create targets. What
> > is your suggestion?
> > (Apart of private MIB)
> > I think that anyway we can allow to create targets via iSCSI
> > MIB; it is MAX-ACCESS and it
> > will be the responsibility of the implementation to update SCSI
> > modules about new targets.
> > Your opinion?
> >
> >
> > > > I hope that you'll aggree to make the change,
> > > >
> > > >         Michele
> > >
> > > --
> > > Mark A. Bakke
> > > Cisco Systems
> > > mbakke@cisco.com
> > > 763.398.1054
> > [MHS]
> > Again Thanks a lot,
> >
> > Michele Hallak-Stamler
> > Sanrad Intelligent Storage
> > michele@sanrad.com
> > 972-3-7674809
> >
>