Re: no DHCP-assigned InitiatorName
<[email protected]> Mon, 22 Sep 2008 14:46:01 -0500
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.ips |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <42D8A6CDC96A5A4D8D91DE26991A51AA02016F63@ausx3mpc108.aus.amer.dell.com> |
My 2 cents based on my understanding of iSNS. - iSNS clients (initiators and targets) need to have an IQN address before they register with the iSNS server. - Most pre-OS iSCSI initiators available today are not iSNS clients i.e. they don't register with and/or query iSNS server. Given this, it seems better to have a DHCP based standardized mechanism for acquiring the initiator IQN. Based on initial email from Michael, most pre-OS iSCSI Initiators available today have the capability to be a DHCP client. Thanks, Gaurav Chawla Technology Strategist, Network Storage Architecture | Office of the CTO, Dell, Inc. Phone: 512.724.4064 (work) -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Michael Howard Sent: Monday, September 22, 2008 2:29 PM To: Iyer, Shyam Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected] Subject: Re: [Ips] no DHCP-assigned InitiatorName [email protected] wrote: > My 2cents on the issue. Please correct me if I am wrong. Thank you for participating in this discussion. > Shouldn't it be possible to configure the isns server with a set of > possibly regex rules for the control path. If this not possible today, > then it could possibly be the root to take towards standardizing. I am not familiar enough with iSNS to comment. I have been exposed to about about a dozen commercial environments with some level of iSCSI use/experimentation. I am not aware that any of them were running iSNS servers. > This can solve the problem of provisioning for dynamic boot environments > with minimum changes to legacy iqn implementations, many of which would > need to relearn to the new iqn mechanism that might end up as a result > of this discussion. Frankly, my concern is that Broadcom/IBM already have a non-standard DHCP Vendor Option work-around for this problem. Adding a new/standardized InitiatorName DHCP option would not break existing initiator implementations. Vendors would integrate support for this new InitiatorName option into their code/firmware releases over time. > Instead of changing numerous configurations we could > simply change the isns server control mechanism. I need to do some homework regarding iSNS. > Comments? iSCSI is still a very small part of the market. I advocate addressing this deficiency sooner rather than later. Michael _______________________________________________ Ips mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ips _______________________________________________ Ips mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ips