RE: Target Behavior Clarifications

<[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.ietf.ips
Message-ID <389040536173ED4AADA5EFEA9633358601677A0E@ausx3mpc106.aus.amer.dell.com>
Sanjay,

  Thanks.

 

 There seems to be an inconsistency in the spec in terms of how the
target is expected to behave when it detects initiator behavior that is
not in line with the negotiated operational parameters. As per the spec
if the target receives any non-immediate unsolicited data when
InitialR2T=Yes, it shall fail the command with a CHECK CONDITION
(0B/0C/0C - COMMAND ABORTED, WRITE ERROR - UNEXPECTED UNSOLICITED DATA)
- Why is this a special case?

 

Thanks,

Jacob

 

________________________________

From: Sanjay Goyal [mailto:[email protected]] 
Sent: Monday, April 17, 2006 5:53 PM
To: Cherian, Jacob; [email protected]
Subject: RE: [Ips] Target Behavior Clarifications

 

Hi,

 

What it indicates is that the other side is misbehaving. It should be
treated as protocol error and the session should be terminated.

 

-Sanjay

 

________________________________

From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] 
Sent: Monday, April 17, 2006 2:49 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: [Ips] Target Behavior Clarifications

A couple of quick questions?

1) What should the behavior of a target be if it receives a PDU on a
connection, larger than what it declared with MaxRecvDataSegmentLength:

- If the PDU is part of a SCSI command? 

- If the PDU is part of a login?

2) What should the target behaviour be if the initiator sends it more
data than MaxBurstLength?

3) What should the target behavior be if the initiator sends more data
than FirstBurstLength?

Any clarification would be greatly appreciated. 

Thanks,

Jacob

_______________________________________________
Ips mailing list
[email protected]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ips
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.