Re: iSCSI: list negotiation description

["Julian Satran" <Julian_Satran@il.ibm.com>]

What version did you look at?  Considering the date of your mail it must have been 12-91 only that 12-91 does not contain the text you quote - Julo

Martins Krikis <mkrikis@yahoo.com> Sent by: owner-ips@ece.cmu.edu 05/23/2002 12:37 AM Please respond to Martins Krikis

To:        ips@ece.cmu.edu         cc:                 Subject:        iSCSI: list negotiation description

First a question again:

What is the point of allowing "inadmissible
values" (or in case of lists, lack of acceptable
values) be answered with an "admissible value"?

Now the problems.

Page 69, bottom paragraph:

  If a responder does support, understand or
  is allowed to use none of the offered options
  with a specific originator, it MAY use the
  constant "Reject" or it MAY respond with an
  admissible value. The selection of a value
  not offered is considered a negotiation
  failure and is handled as a protocol error.

http://www.pdl.cmu.edu/mailinglists/ips/mail/msg10066.html
made me believe that the phrase "or it MAY respond
with an admissible value..." will be removed.

Since it hasn't been, I'll point out again that
it contradicts the very next sentence, because
this "admissible value" would be a "value not
offered".
Also, I must say that I almost regret having
started picking on the beginning of this paragraph,
because IMHO it has gotten worse. I'm still
proposing this:

  If each of the offered values is not understood
  or not supported, or the responder is not allowed
  to use it with the specific originator, it MUST
  use the constant "Reject".

Note that because other reasonable alternatives
are eliminated, the original "MAY" can change to
"MUST". (Which should be a good thing, BTW.)

Thanks,

  Martins Krikis, Intel Corp.

Disclaimer: these opinions are my own and may not
            not be those of my employer


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
LAUNCH - Your Yahoo! Music Experience
http://launch.yahoo.com