Re: Targets that don't want to support discovery
William Studenmund <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.ips |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On Apr 27, 2006, at 11:50 AM, Eddy Quicksall wrote: > Appendix D says: > A system that contains targets MUST support discovery sessions on > each of its iSCSI IP address-port pairs, and MUST support the > SendTargets command on the discovery session > > Suppose I have targets A, B and C. I want target A to be the only > target that can support discovery. Login to targets B and C will be > redirected by A. > > This is fine except for the fact that once the redirection occurs > the initiator has the address of B and C and could open a discovery > session to B or C. > > I'm thinking that I could have B and C redirect to A for any > discovery session hence A would become the only target to support > discovery (but that would "break the law"). > > I'm wondering how the community thinks this should be handled. I have a feeling that that'd be breaking the rules. Why do you want to do this? Another option is that while ports B and C should support discovery sessions, they don't have to do it very efficiently. It's fine if they use some sort of proxy to internally route the commands to A for processing. So only A is very smart, but discovery works everywhere. Take care, Bill _______________________________________________ Ips mailing list [email protected] https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ips
PGP.sig
(application/pgp-signature, 186 B) - not displayed