RE: iSCSI: DLB's [T.37] 11.12 ImmediateData

[Black_David@emc.com]

So the entire specification of how this pair of related features

(immediate data and unsolicited Data-In PDUs) behaves is in

one place.  I think I've seen a suggestion from Brian Forbes

to add subsection headings to 2.2.4 - perhaps a reference

back to the appropriate subsection will do the trick.

 

--David

-----Original Message-----
From: Julian Satran [mailto:Julian_Satran@il.ibm.com]
Sent: Monday, July 08, 2002 2:30 PM
To: Black_David@emc.com
Cc: ips@ece.cmu.edu; owner-ips@ece.cmu.edu; rod.harrison@windriver.com
Subject: RE: iSCSI: DLB's [T.37] 11.12 ImmediateData
Importance: High

But that statement already appears in 2.2.4  Why repeat it? Julo

Black_David@emc.com Sent by: owner-ips@ece.cmu.edu 07/08/2002 05:13 PM Please respond to Black_David

To:        rod.harrison@windriver.com, ips@ece.cmu.edu         cc:                 Subject:        RE: iSCSI: DLB's [T.37] 11.12 ImmediateData

>                  I believe the MAY is to allow the initiator to send no unsolicited
> data if it so chooses. For non-immediate unsolicited the rule was the
> initiator MUST send all of the unsolicited data possible, or no
> unsolicited data. The presence of the F bit in the latter case removes
> the possibility of any confusion over the amount of unsolicited data
> at the target.

Yes, you're correct.  Adding a "MUST send all of the unsolicited
data possible" statement and leaving the "MAY"s as they are
would take care of this.

Thanks,
--David
---------------------------------------------------
David L. Black, Senior Technologist
EMC Corporation, 42 South St., Hopkinton, MA  01748
+1 (508) 249-6449            FAX: +1 (508) 497-8018
black_david@emc.com       Mobile: +1 (978) 394-7754
---------------------------------------------------