Hi Dan,
An RFC 4544 based implementation should continue to work. The value of
iSCSIProtocolLevel to be 2 or higher is required to enable use of features in
iSCSI SCSI Feature update (iscsi-sam). The new objects are required only when
the iSCSIProtocolLevel is negotiated to 2 or higher. It is defined as a
Conditionally mandatory group. Please note the corresponding portions of the
MIB module below:
--
iscsiNewObjectsV2 OBJECT-GROUP
OBJECTS {
iscsiInstXNodeArchitecture,
iscsiSsnTaskReporting,
iscsiSsnProtocolLevel,
iscsiSsnNopReceivedPDUs,
iscsiSsnNopSentPDUs,
iscsiIntrLastTgtFailurePort,
iscsiTgtLastIntrFailurePort,
iscsiPortalDescr,
iscsiInstSsnTgtUnmappedErrors,
iscsiTgtLogoutCxnClosed,
iscsiTgtLogoutCxnRemoved
}
STATUS current
DESCRIPTION
"A collection of objects added in the second version of the
iSCSI MIB."
--
GROUP iscsiNewObjectsV2
DESCRIPTION
"This group is mandatory for all iSCSI implementations
that support a value of the iSCSIProtocolLevel key of
2 or greater."
--
When an implementation is upgraded to enable using the features of iscsi-sam,
it should start using the new MIB module as well. Until then, the new objects
are not required.
regards
Prakash
________________________________________
From: Romascanu, Dan (Dan) [[email protected]]
Sent: Wednesday, April 03, 2013 5:01 PM
To: Prakash Venkatesen, ERS-HCLTech; [email protected]
Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]; Martin Stiemerling; [email protected]
Subject: RE: Gen-ART Review of draft-ietf-storm-iscsimib-03.txt
Hi Prakash,
Thank you for addressing the issues raised in the Gen-ART review. The changes
made on issues 2 and 3 are fine, however, one clarification is still needed
regarding the first issue. See below (agreed stuff deleted).
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Prakash Venkatesen, ERS-HCLTech [mailto:[email protected]]
>
> Summary: Almost Ready
>
> Major issues:
>
> 1) This document will obsolete (when approved) RFC 4544, and add support
> for iSCSI protocol evolution according to the consolidated version of
> the iSCSI protocol (as per draft-ietf-storm-iscsi-cons) and for the
> updates to iSCSI (as per draft-ietf-storm-iscsi-sam) for ProtocolLevel.
> There is no indication however in for the operators when an upgrade is
> recommended or becomes mandatory, and which version of the protocol is
> to be used during the transition, function of the iSCSI versions of the
> protocol.
>
> Prakash> As per rough consensus of STORM group, the new features are
> required when implementation supports a value of the iSCSIProtocolLevel
> key of 2 or greater. The new draft has this change.
>
[[DR]] 'the new features are required' means that the MIB support MUST be
updated accordingly when the iSCSI updates are deployed? In other words, would
an RFC 4544 - based implementation break, or it will continue to work (with
functional limitations) until the updated MIB version is introduced?
Thanks and Regards,
Dan
::DISCLAIMER::
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The contents of this e-mail and any attachment(s) are confidential and intended
for the named recipient(s) only.
E-mail transmission is not guaranteed to be secure or error-free as information
could be intercepted, corrupted,
lost, destroyed, arrive late or incomplete, or may contain viruses in
transmission. The e mail and its contents
(with or without referred errors) shall therefore not attach any liability on
the originator or HCL or its affiliates.
Views or opinions, if any, presented in this email are solely those of the
author and may not necessarily reflect the
views or opinions of HCL or its affiliates. Any form of reproduction,
dissemination, copying, disclosure, modification,
distribution and / or publication of this message without the prior written
consent of authorized representative of
HCL is strictly prohibited. If you have received this email in error please
delete it and notify the sender immediately.
Before opening any email and/or attachments, please check them for viruses and
other defects.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Gen-art mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art
