SORT BY:

LIST ORDER
THREAD
AUTHOR
SUBJECT


SEARCH

IPS HOME


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

    RE: iSCSI: keys/parameter dependence



    Picking up on this in the middle of a thread, I
    find the following reply from Bob Russell
    interesting:
    
    > > It's
    > > probably irrelevant, since due to the introduction
    > > of the C-bit, parameters can be accumulated and
    > > processed one "batch" at a time, without any
    > > specific order within the "batch" and they will
    > > quite likely not be processed PDU by PDU.
    > 
    > I don't see this either.  Nowhere does the newly added text
    > describing the C-bit say anything about doing away with the
    > specific order of the key=value pairs within the "batch".
    > Why should it -- even if you don't process PDU by PDU you still
    > have to process batch by batch, a batch still has to be scanned
    > to find key=value pairs, and the natural way to scan is from the
    > beginning of the batch, since the next key starts after the
    > delimiter of the previous key in the batch.
    > This is also a non-issue.
    
    Skimming over rev 12, I have not found the word "order"
    applied in the context of processing a string of 
    key=value pairs.  While they
    must clearly be parsed linearly, it is perfectly reasonable
    to process the parsed values in any order, or even in 
    a vendor-specific order than makes sense to a particular
    target.  That is why key=value pairs are used in the
    first place, so that one does not have to worry about 
    ordering.  In this context, batching would be normal behavior
    and out of order processing within a batch would also be
    normal behavior.  If you want to order processing, you would
    have to send them one at a time without the C bit set.
    


Home

Last updated: Tue Jun 04 15:18:39 2002
10500 messages in chronological order