RE: FCIP: Intent of standard in 6.6.2.2

[Sudhir Srinivasan <SudhirS@trebia.com>]

Barry,

I think the standard is not worded precisely enough here.
For instance, the para right after the text you highlighted
seems to make it ambiguous - it can be interpreted as saying
that really only length field test failures are sync errors 
and the other tests are not necessarily so (which makes sense
to me). I think this should be clarified with the authors.

- Sudhir

   Errors in FCIP Frame headers SHOULD be considered carefully, since
   some may be synchronization errors. For example, any failure of the
   Length field tests described above SHALL be handled as a
   synchronization error. Errors in FCIP Frames detected by the FCIP_DE
   that affect synchronization with the Encapsulated Frame Receiver
   Portal byte stream SHALL be handled as defined by section 6.6.2.4.
 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Trebia Networks, Inc.    Sudhir.Srinivasan@trebia.com
978-929-0830 x139        www.trebia.com
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Barry Reinhold [mailto:bbrtrebia@mediaone.net]
> Sent: Thursday, September 06, 2001 2:23 PM
> To: ISCSI
> Subject: FCIP: Intent of standard in 6.6.2.2
> 
> 
> I would like to ensure that I am understanding the intent of 
> the standard
> correctly relative to clause 6.6.2.2 (draft 05).
> 
> Under the verification SHALL be accomplished....
> 
> item C "At least 6 other of the 21 distinct tests listed above."
> 
> This means that there SHALL be six other fields tested and 
> that if any one
> of them fail then sync. in the TCP stream shall not be 
> considered acquired.
> It also means that a frame with 15 fields in error could pass the
> verification test of some device and that device would still 
> be consider
> compliant. Anyone reading this differently?
> 
> Barry Reinhold
> Principal Architect
> Trebia Networks
> barry.reinhold@trebia.com
> 603-868-5144/603-659-0885/978-929-0830 x138
>