SORT BY:

LIST ORDER
THREAD
AUTHOR
SUBJECT


SEARCH

IPS HOME


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

    RE: Associating initiator names with SCSI commands



    1) Editorial comment:
       chapter 1 defines SCSI Port Name as:
       A name made up as UTF-8 characters and basically...
       +---+
       Remove basically
       +---+
    
    2) The iSCSI namning model on page 49 shows two iSCSI target nodes
       sharing the same portal group and the same TCP/IP addresses.
       How can one steer PDU headers to the correct iSCSI node given
       that setup?  Does it mean that a TCP connection doesn't belong
       to a single iSCSI session?
    
    Amir
    
    
    
    -----Original Message-----
    From: owner-ips@ece.cmu.edu [mailto:owner-ips@ece.cmu.edu]On Behalf Of
    Julian Satran
    Sent: Tuesday, May 07, 2002 12:12 PM
    To: Ken Craig
    Cc: ips@ece.cmu.edu; owner-ips@ece.cmu.edu
    Subject: Re: Associating initiator names with SCSI commands
    
    
    No - the session is associated with the initiator - if you record the
    session on which you received the command you have the association.
    How you represent internally the session is an implementation issue - but I
    assume you will not uses the names for that!
    
    Julo
    
    
    |---------+---------------------------->
    |         |           "Ken Craig"      |
    |         |           <kcraig@istor.com|
    |         |           >                |
    |         |           Sent by:         |
    |         |           owner-ips@ece.cmu|
    |         |           .edu             |
    |         |                            |
    |         |                            |
    |         |           05/07/2002 07:11 |
    |         |           PM               |
    |         |           Please respond to|
    |         |           "Ken Craig"      |
    |         |                            |
    |---------+---------------------------->
    
    >---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    ------------------------------------|
      |
    |
      |       To:       <ips@ece.cmu.edu>
    |
      |       cc:
    |
      |       Subject:  Associating initiator names with SCSI commands
    |
      |
    |
      |
    |
    
    >---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    ------------------------------------|
    
    
    
    I have a question concerning associating
    incoming SCSI commands with an initiator.
    I come from a parallel SCSI background and
    now find myself implementing a SCSI Target
    port in an iSCSI world.  I have searched
    the mailing list archives for discussions
    on this subject but have been unable to find
    anything that succinctly answers my question
    so please bear with me.
    
    In the parallel SCSI world association of an
    initiator with a new command is very
    straight-forward as the initiator's ID is
    encapsulated in the Identify message that
    occurs with the SCSI Selection phase that
    precedes receiving the new command.
    
    When I read the latest version of the iSCSI
    draft (rev. 12) the only statement I seem to
    find that correlates to this association is
    in Section 2.2.3 on page 34 in the 2nd
    sentence of the 3rd paragraph.
    
    "Any persistent state (e.g., persistent reservations)
    on the target that is associated with a SCSI
    initiator port is identified based on the
    value pair (InitiatorName, ISID)."
    
    When I searched the mailing list archives I
    came across statements that said this
    association was done using ISID and TSID (now
    TSIH?) but I do not see these statements in the
    latest draft so I'm assuming that there was some
    reason this association method was dropped.
    
    My question is:
    In order to associate initiators with incoming
    commands to a SCSI Target do I have to compare
    the Initiator Name and ISID (up to ~268 bytes?)
    for every command I receive against a list of
    logged in initiators or is there another method
    using a lot fewer number of bytes?
    
    I had thought about using the IP address in the
    IP header but the draft seems to say that is not
    allowed because IP addresses can change.  It
    seems like I must perform this potentially rather
    long comparison if I support multiple initiators
    because I can not be guaranteed that different
    initiators would not use the same ISID during
    their login.  Am I wrong?
    
    Thanks in advance,
    Kenneth Ray Craig, Jr.
    
    
    
    
    
    
    


Home

Last updated: Thu May 09 15:18:32 2002
10029 messages in chronological order