RE: iscsi : changes involving tgt portal group tag.

["KRUEGER,MARJORIE (HP-Roseville,ex1)" <marjorie_krueger@hp.com>]

Perhaps we should discuss this in Minneapolis.  I agree with Santosh, TPG should be added to the login message to verify that this is the intended target port.  I don't see how that is interpreted as "discovery territory", since it's just the initiator explicitly identifying the intended target port.  Currently a login contains initiator and target names, and initiator port number (ISID), so adding target port number is consistent.  There's still room in the login header, and this wouldn't break any current implementations.  Why is this a problem?

 

Marjorie Krueger
Networked Storage Architecture
Networked Storage Solutions Org.
Hewlett-Packard
tel: +1 916 785 2656
fax: +1 916 785 0391
email: marjorie_krueger@hp.com

-----Original Message-----
From: Julian Satran [mailto:Julian_Satran@il.ibm.com]
Sent: Tuesday, March 12, 2002 11:42 AM
To: Santosh Rao
Cc: IPS Reflector; santoshr@hpcuhe.cup.hp.com
Subject: Re: iscsi : changes involving tgt portal group tag.

I did not hear compelling arguments for it and it drags us even more into discovery teritory - Julo

Santosh Rao <santoshr@cup.hp.com> Sent by: santoshr@hpcuhe.cup.hp.com 12-03-02 21:04 Please respond to Santosh Rao

To:        Julian Satran/Haifa/IBM@IBMIL         cc:        IPS Reflector <ips@ece.cmu.edu>         Subject:        Re: iscsi : changes involving tgt portal group tag.

What is the closure on this issue ? Will the Target Portal Group Tag be
a part of the login request ?

- Santosh


> (assuming we have the TPGT in the Login Request PDU),

--
##################################
Santosh Rao
Software Design Engineer,
HP-UX iSCSI Driver Team,
Hewlett Packard, Cupertino.
email : santoshr@cup.hp.com
Phone : 408-447-3751
##################################