SORT BY:

LIST ORDER
THREAD
AUTHOR
SUBJECT


SEARCH

IPS HOME


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

    Re: iSCSI: login issue - partial consensus call



    
    The X bit sematic in login today is "restart the connection".
    You may add to it "restart the session" and Marjorie was the only one
    (mildly) objecting to it.
    However I would like to point out that the C bit has no real value if not
    checked as users are prone to set it always on.
    If checking is out then A is good enough.
    
    Julo
    
    Black_David@emc.com@ece.cmu.edu on 31-08-2001 07:24:17
    
    Please respond to Black_David@emc.com
    
    Sent by:  owner-ips@ece.cmu.edu
    
    
    To:   ips@ece.cmu.edu
    cc:
    Subject:  iSCSI: login issue - partial consensus call
    
    
    
    A review of this long running thread.  We started out with
    Mallikarjun's three options:
    
           A) Should iSCSI let it happen by default as stated above (i.e.
              same ISID, TSID=0 always wipes out the pre-existing session
              on target, since we are mandating it to be used only when
              initiator sees a session failure)?
           B) Should iSCSI mandate making this intended cleanup explicit
              by setting a bit (Say C-bit, for Clear) in the Login Command
              PDU to prevent an accidental session cleanup with a buggy
              initiator code?
           C) Should iSCSI merely state that targets must ascertain
              the connection state(s) whenever a new session creation
              attempt is made with a known ISID and TSID=0?  (sort of
              defeats the intention of the initiator wanting quicker
              session recovery since the Login command PDU would have
              to idle till target ascertains the connection state(s)).
    
    Based on my review of the emails, here's what I think the state
    of the discussion is:
    
    (1) I see no support for Option C.  The remaining options are A, B, and
         Julian's version of B in which the X bit is reused as the C bit.
    
    (2) I see strong objections to the reuse of the X bit that Julian
         proposed, and no interest in it from anyone other than Julian.
         The objections are that the X bit is already heavily involved
         in error recovery and adding more semantics to it is an invitation
         to trouble. Therefore, I believe the rough consensus of the IPS
         WG is that the X bit is not to be reused in this fashion.
    
    (3) I believe the rough consensus is that the situation being analyzed
         here can occur as a consequence of an initiator reboot (i.e.,
         if the reboot is fast with respect to the target's timeout-based
         session cleanup).
    
    The consensus calls in (2) and (3) are over Julian Satran's proposal/
    comments/objection.  Anyone else who objects to these should post to
    the list.
    
    This leaves options A and B as originally stated.  Most people seem
    to be in favor of option A - the two exceptions I noticed were
    Julian and Venkat.  Julian's objection can be summarized with a
    couple of quotes:
    
    > Option A is prone to "wild closing of sessions"
    > Option A is clearly unacceptable as an initiator may do harm.
    
    The wild closing of sessions seems to be based on a different
    iSCSI interface with the same Initiator name using the same
    ISID.  This is a definite risk as it's an area in which iSCSI
    differs from Fibre Channel.  FC identifies sessions via hardware
    identities which tend to be static and unique, and set by the
    hardware vendor.  The iSCSI ISID is a dynamically managed
    entity, and bugs in managing it across multiple interfaces
    (which may involve hardware and software from multiple
    vendors) will cause this session closing problem, whereas for
    it to happen in FC, the hardware identity has to be duplicated.
    
    FWIW, I do know of an FC system that rejects duplicate logins
    under some circumstances rather than implicitly destroying
    the existing session, although I don't believe that behavior
    can be overridden via inband means as is proposed here.
    
    OTOH, a different OS should have different iSCSI Initiator Name,
    and denial of service attacks should be foiled by proper use of
    authentication.  I also tend to agree with the architectural
    point of view that an initiator is in charge of its own sessions.
    So, I think Julian has a point here, although some of the things
    he's posted are overstated.
    
    This is also Venkat's concern - unintentional reuse of an ISID
    by the same Initiator:
    
    > 2. There is some value in protecting an accidental use of an
    > existing ISID by a second client (ISID=<existing>, TSID=0).
    > This can be done with a Reject of the login attempt,
    
    In contrast to some of the responses to Venkat, I interpret
    "client" to mean another iSCSI port on the same Initiator, and
    then his concern matches Julian's.  Venkat seems to think that
    there's a useful distinction between boot scenarios in which
    teardown of existing sessions is needed and boot scenarios
    in which it's not needed  - I have no idea how to figure that
    out in practice, and suspect that Marj is right when she says
    that the C bit will be set all the time.  I agree that the
    C bit is always set in a session recovery scenario because
    the intent is to blow away the existing session.
    
    So, I'm not ready to call consensus on the A vs. B. issue.
    In hopes of making further progress, I would ask the
    proponents of B (Venkat, Julian, and anyone else who thinks
    this is valuable - I assume Julian prefers B to A, even if
    the WG does not like using the X bit for B) to post short
    answers to the following questions:
    
         Under what circumstances would an Initiator not set the
         C bit for option B?  What information would the Initiator use
         to decide not to set the C bit?
    
    I apologize if this was in some of the emails and I missed
    it - there were a lot of them.
    
    Thanks,
    --David
    
    ---------------------------------------------------
    David L. Black, Senior Technologist
    EMC Corporation, 42 South St., Hopkinton, MA  01748
    +1 (508) 435-1000 x75140     FAX: +1 (508) 497-8500
    black_david@emc.com       Mobile: +1 (978) 394-7754
    ---------------------------------------------------
    
    
    
    


Home

Last updated: Tue Sep 04 01:03:49 2001
6315 messages in chronological order