Subject: Re: iscsi Rev 7.93 : text cmd & bookmarks.

From: "Julian Satran" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 18 Sep 2001 11:29:26 +0300

You are right - I've almost completed doing it - Julo

Santosh Rao <[email-masked]>@ece.cmu.edu on 17-09-2001 21:26:26

Please respond to Santosh Rao <[email-masked]>

Sent by:  [email-masked]

To:   IPS Reflector <[email-masked]>
cc:
Subject:  iscsi Rev 7.93 : text cmd & bookmarks.

Hi Julian,

Thanks for adding the target transfer tag field to the text command
& text response. This allows for simpler indexing for targets without
having to special case the text message lookups.

Also, as you've observed and incorporated, the target transfer tag field
itself serves as a bookmark and so, the bookmark field has been removed.

One question remains however. Since the target transfer tag field serves
as a bookmark and a TTT of 0xFFFFFFFF serves as an indication that this
is a new text command (i.e. no bookmark present), of what value add is
the bookmark bit ? Why not remove the bookmark bit itself and only use
the TTT ?

Keeping both the bookmark bit and the TTT is providing 2 ways of
indicating a new text cmd. I would be in favor of removal of the
bookmark bit.

Regards,
Santosh

 - santoshr.vcf

---

From: "Julian Satran" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 19 Sep 2001 06:07:41 +0300

Targets will have an indexing mechanism based on TTT and the bookmark will
reuse it.
The 1 outstanding text command is a resource statement.

Julo

"Ayman Ghanem" <[email-masked]>@ece.cmu.edu on 17-09-2001 22:55:38

Please respond to "Ayman Ghanem" <[email-masked]>

To:   <[email-masked]>
cc:
Subject:  RE: iscsi Rev 7.93 : text cmd & bookmarks.

I could be missing something, but I am not sure why do we have TTT in text
cmd/rsp if there MUST be only one outstanding text cmd per connection. Text
command lookup implies to me more than one outstanding cmd, but that would
be a protocol error.

-Ayman

> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]]On Behalf Of
> Santosh Rao
> Sent: Monday, September 17, 2001 1:26 PM
> To: IPS Reflector