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

["Fischer, Michael" <Michael_Fischer@adaptec.com>]

Ok, I am probably sticking my nose where it doesn't belong but... If there
is a post to the working group in reference to the spec doesn't that
indicate that the spec is ambiguous and should be examined in more detail?
People that start working with iSCSI after the draft phase may have the same
questions and should be able to find the answer in the spec and not have to
sort through electronic reams of newsgroup posts to determine the
appropriate result.  I know that the spec has to tread a narrow line so as
not to mandate implementation but at the same time the spec has to be clear
enough that someone can come along and make an implementation and be fairly
reassured that their implementation will interoperate with someone else's.

Just my $.02, well more like $1.50.

Michael Fischer

Disclaimer:  Obviously, these opinions are mine and mine alone and I fully
expect to get flamed for them.

-----Original Message-----
From: John Hufferd [mailto:hufferd@us.ibm.com]
Sent: Tuesday, April 23, 2002 10:59 PM
To: Martins Krikis
Cc: ips@ece.cmu.edu
Subject: Re: iSCSI: Questions regarding text parameter 'Reject' and
'Irrelevant' usage



Lets see if we can avoid rehashing the issues around Boolean values.  This
has been gone over and over on this list, and does not need to be redone in
the last call.  Likewise the issues around Irrelevant.

There may or may not be value around the rest of your statements, but lets
not visit again  Boolean or Irrelevant .

.
.
.
John L. Hufferd
Senior Technical Staff Member (STSM)
IBM/SSG San Jose Ca
Main Office (408) 256-0403, Tie: 276-0403,  eFax: (408) 904-4688
Home Office (408) 997-6136, Cell: (408) 499-9702
Internet address: hufferd@us.ibm.com