RE: iSCSI: Questions regarding text parameter 'Reject' and 'Irrelevant' usage

[pat_thaler@agilent.com]

Julian,

There seems to be some contradictory text with regard to whether an
inadmissible value can be responded to by offering an admissible value
rather than a reject.

4.2 is compatible with this saying: All negotiations are stateless and
explicit (i.e., the result MUST be based only on newly exchanged values). 

but 4.3 says: Neither the initiator nor the target should attempt to
negotiate a parameter more than once during login If detected by the target
this
MUST result in a Login reject (initiator error). The initiator MUST
drop the connection.
4.4 has similar text with adjustments for post login negotiation behavior.

If renegotiation of a parameter MUST cause negotiation failure, then
negotiation is not stateless.

If the following sequence of events happens:
Initiator offers value x
Target responds with value y 
Initiator finds value y to be inadmissible and offers the parameter again
(either with x or a new value z).

Doesn't that look to the target like the initiator is trying to negotiate
the parameter more than once and cause the Target to do a Login reject (or
negotiation reset)? How does a device differentiate between continued
negotiation of a parameter because it's answer wasn't accepted and new
negotiation?

Why not just allow the negotiation to be stateless as 4.2 says?

Pat

-----Original Message-----
From: Julian Satran [mailto:Julian_Satran@il.ibm.com]

some comments in text - Julo 

Nick Bellinger <nickb@attheoffice.org> 

Greetings,

                I have a few questions regarding the wording as per
iSCSI-v12 4.2  Text
Mode Negotiation:

                "An offer of a value not admissible MAY be answered with the
constant
"Reject". The selection of a value not admissible under
                the selection rules is considered a negotiation failure and
is 
                handled accordingly."

1. Is a responder allowed to return an admissable value (its default
value for the key) instead of using the 'Reject' constant? 

+++ the text clearly allows this +++