SORT BY:

LIST ORDER
THREAD
AUTHOR
SUBJECT


SEARCH

IPS HOME


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

    RE: I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-ips-scsi-mib-04.txt


    • To: "Mark Bakke" <mbakke@cisco.com>, "KRUEGER,MARJORIE (HP-Roseville,ex1)" <marjorie.krueger@hp.com>
    • Subject: RE: I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-ips-scsi-mib-04.txt
    • From: "Amir Shalit" <amir@astutenetworks.com>
    • Date: Wed, 30 Oct 2002 11:07:15 -0800
    • Cc: <ips@ece.cmu.edu>
    • content-class: urn:content-classes:message
    • Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
    • Content-Type: text/plain;charset="us-ascii"
    • Sender: owner-ips@ece.cmu.edu
    • Thread-Index: AcKARoymGFSDU3F8QZWzWl2dbe/vHwAABQVQ
    • Thread-Topic: I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-ips-scsi-mib-04.txt

    I agree on both counts. 
    
    Its only that the expression "LUN mapping" got me confused with
    "virtualization LUN mapping".
    
    Amir
    
    -----Original Message-----
    From: Mark Bakke [mailto:mbakke@cisco.com] 
    Sent: Wednesday, October 30, 2002 11:00 AM
    To: KRUEGER,MARJORIE (HP-Roseville,ex1)
    Cc: Amir Shalit; ips@ece.cmu.edu
    Subject: Re: I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-ips-scsi-mib-04.txt
    
    
    "KRUEGER,MARJORIE (HP-Roseville,ex1)" wrote:
    > 
    > > 1) Read/Write counters
    > >
    > > Counter32 (counting MB transferred) wrap at about 1000 hours on 
    > > 10Gbps links. Can we the MIB use a Counter64 instead?
    > 
    > We want to accommodate SNMPv1 agents (which can't implement 
    > Counter64), so we can add an optional counter64.  Thanks for the 
    > reminder!
    
    Since we are back to an optional counter64, should it be in bytes
    instead of MB?
    
    > 
    > > 2) Virtualization
    > >
    > > An attempt was made to list all LU's which are part of a LUN. In my 
    > > opinion, the ultimate mechanism to represent hierarchical volumes is
    
    > > via a volume manager MIB. For the time being it will be useful to 
    > > associate a {start LBA, end LBA} vector with each LU to allow for 
    > > most simplistic virtualization mapping.
    > 
    > I'm not sure what you mean.  The MIB lists all the LU's that are 
    > contained within a Target device, and then a table of all the LUN 
    > mappings for those LU's.  I don't really think of "LU's being part of 
    > a LUN" - the MIB doesn't try to accommodate virtualization, we agree 
    > that virtualization is better represented via another MIB.  This MIB 
    > is an attempt to represent the simple
    > (average?) SCSI device.  Section 3.4 states that this MIB is not meant
    to
    > address virtual devices, merely the "visible SCSI attributes" (what a
    host
    > will see).
    
    I agree with Marj.  Note that even target mapping (e.g. map a FC target
    to an iSCSI target) or LUN mapping are outside the scope of a SCSI MIB.
    
    > Regards,
    > Marjorie Krueger
    > Networked Storage Architecture
    > Networked Storage Solutions
    > Hewlett-Packard
    
    -- 
    Mark A. Bakke
    Cisco Systems
    mbakke@cisco.com
    763.398.1054
    


Home

Last updated: Wed Oct 30 15:18:59 2002
11999 messages in chronological order