SORT BY:

LIST ORDER
THREAD
AUTHOR
SUBJECT


SEARCH

IPS HOME


    [Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

    Re: iSCSI : EnableACA



    } Ralph,
    }
    } I am not sure that I understand the question.
    
    Looks like you have done a good job to me.
    
    } After the reset task management functions iSCSI requires
    } the target enter Unit Attention for all other initiators
    } connected to the same target (or LU) and, after reporting
    } the Unit Attention enter ACA.
    }
    } You and Ed pointed out that many initiators will be unable
    } to handle this (will not reset the condition).
    }
    } EnableACA is a hack intended to allow an initiator to control
    } the target behavior.
    
    First off, unless Asynchronous Event Reporting is enabled,
    Unit Attention conditions get reported with a CHECK CONDITION
    status, bingo ACA is controlled in the usual way with the
    NACA bit.
    
    Second, Ed is going to cover Unit Attention conditions in his
    proposal, in fact that was Ed's hot button that got him writing
    a proposal.  Ed's proposal does not exactly make Unit Attention
    engage an ACA, instead he is proposing to give the Unit Attention
    condition an ACA-like longevity (i.e., the Unit Attention
    condition stays active until the initiator acknowledges it).
    
    So, I am wondering why the EnableACA is needed.  From my point of
    view, putting something like EnableACA in the protocol definition
    is bad layering (not that SCSI has always observed good layering,
    but why continue to promote bad habits).
    
    } NormACA and the NACA CDB bit have similar purposes but
    } NormACA is a "read-only" flag and the ACA condition is not
    } created in this case as a result of a command execution error
    } but as a result of an action by an external factor (another
    } initiator).
    }
    } This situation is probably more general - and some other
    } transports dealing with commands in flight might experience
    } a similar problem but up to now SPC has no way of handling
    } this situation.
    }
    } If Ed is going to cover this within the "extended use of ACA"
    } we discussed for SCSI commands rejected with busy and task set
    } full and for Unit Attention we might have to coordinate.
    
    I think we need to coordinate.  It also may be necessary to
    give Ed a gentle nudge.
    
    Thanks.
    
    Ralph...
    
    
    
    


Home

Last updated: Tue Sep 04 01:04:50 2001
6315 messages in chronological order