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

    RE: ips : Is FirstBurstSize valid when InitialR2T=yes ?

    "Reject" is not an acceptable response in this situation. "Reject" for a numerical negotiation indicates that there was a problem with the value offered - it was out of the specified bounds.
    See 4.2 "The constants "None", "Reject", "Irrelevant", and "NotUnderstood" are
    reserved and must only be used as described here." and  4.2.2: "An offer of a value not admissible (e.g., not within the specified bounds) MAY be answered
    with the constant "Reject" or the responder MAY select an admissible
    value." (The other uses of Reject are specific to list and range negotiations.)
    The offered value was within the specified bounds so it should not be rejected.
    -----Original Message-----
    From: Martin, Nick []
    Sent: Thursday, February 07, 2002 5:38 PM
    To: Eddy Quicksall
    Cc: Santosh Rao; IPS Reflector
    Subject: RE: ips : Is FirstBurstSize valid when InitialR2T=yes ?
    I think the value Irrelevant should be used sparingly.  In this case,
    the values 512, Irrelevant, and Reject will have the same effect on
    subsequent packets on the wire unless and until ImmediateData or
    InitialR2T are negotiated again.  At that time the current value of
    FirstBurstSize again becomes useful.  There is some rule about least
    surprise which I can not quote at the moment, but given that these three
    possible return values produce the same result, I would send the 512
    since that will be least surprising to the initiator.
    Remember that Irrelevant does not mean forgotten.  There is still a
    current value in effect, even if the target chooses not to re-negotiate
    it at this time.  I would not choose to refuse to accept the new value
    for FirstBurstSize.  However if I wanted to so choose, I think I would
    use Reject.
    If the target does not support unsolicited nor immediate data and will
    never use the value FirstBurstSize, it could still keep a current value
    for the field.  In doing so it will be less likely to force an initiator
    down a seldom trodden path.  


Last updated: Fri Jun 14 14:18:42 2002
10820 messages in chronological order