Re: iSCSI: 12-97 Bit Rule

[Luben Tuikov <luben@splentec.com>]

Bill Studenmund wrote:
> 
> 
> Yes, actually, I do. 1) An independent reader of the document agreed with
> the author as to the meaning of the bit ordering. This fact is important
> as authors (as I have found with most of the technical documents I have
> written) have an intimate association with the document, and as such may
> not see things as an independent reader would. 2) I wasn't repeating
> Julian, I was expressing my opinion. The fact we agree indicates that
> we agree. :-)

So, this is all contrary to the fact that you mentioned
that it is indeed confusing in a previous letter on this thread.

As I said: we'll just wait to see for the comments
from the industruy and the implementers. Especially
the Linux community, which has defied all
``consensus'', ``ideology'', and what-not,
and has chosen for the ``makes sense'' attitude.
(Badly quoted from Linus.)
 
> > Anyway, if you had paid attention you'd have noticed
> > that the algorithm I sent DOESN'T DEPEND on the
> > bit numbering (7:0 or 0:7) of the draft. _This_
> > was the more important subject (and my point)...
> 
> Then why distract everyone by talking about bit sequence?

So that it doesn't matter if YOU count bits 0 to 7 or 7 to 0
in a byte. So that anyone can implement it anyway.

-- 
Luben