RE: iSCSI virtualization

["GUPTA,SOMESH (HP-Cupertino,ex1)" <somesh_gupta@am.exch.hp.com>]

I think this is an implementation issue and there are models
to achieve this (Large Arrays as an example) without accomodating
it in the iSCSI protocol. A virtualization protocol could be
extended to add requirements for cache managers and requirements
for mirroring etc - sort of like an "open array protocol"?

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Yaron Klein [mailto:klein@eng.tau.ac.il]
> Sent: Friday, October 13, 2000 4:10 AM
> To: ips@ece.cmu.edu
> Subject: RE: iSCSI virtualization
> 
> 
> Jim and John:
> 
> The matter is iSCSI and iSCSI only. The title should be:
> 
> Encapsulation of piggyback (SCSI) commands in the iSCSI protocol.
> 
> And the virtualization is just one example of the benefits of this
> encapsulation option. Many other examples can be found (as Julian
> mentioned and more: smart proxies, virtual caches, smart 
> mirroring etc).
> My main request from the WG is to add the option: "iSCSI 
> reflection" in
> the iSCSI status (note again: iSCSI matter) in the status message.
> 
> Charles:
> 
> It looks as there are some applications that will require the 
> status to
> be sent first to the manager (i.e., not to the initiator) or 
> to both the
> initiator and the manager. I guess there are to ways to set it:
> 
> 1. In the negotiation phase, set it permanently, or
> 2. In the iSCSI command, add another bit to determine to who 
> the status
> should be sent (initiator, manager or both).
> 
> But first you should help me to convince the group to insert the
> piggyback option to the protocol and than we will battle for 
> the status
> issue.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Yaron Klein
> SANRAD
> klein@sanrad.com
> 
>