Hi Prakash, Thanks for this further clarification.
>From my perspective the document is Ready. Regards, Dan > -----Original Message----- > From: Prakash Venkatesen, ERS-HCLTech [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Wednesday, April 03, 2013 3:16 PM > To: Romascanu, Dan (Dan); [email protected] > Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]; Martin Stiemerling; > [email protected] > Subject: RE: Gen-ART Review of draft-ietf-storm-iscsimib-03.txt > > 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
