On Tue, Nov 4, 2008 at 7:19 PM, Peter Cudhea <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Thanks for pointing me back to the earlier messages in the thread.
> When the thread originally came out, I was not involved in iSCSI.
>
> The earlier messages said that you took snoop traces and saw the HP
> initiator sending a SendTargets response to the target and then getting
> back a Target address of (for example) 192.168.1.70,1 .   And you said
> that the HP initiator chokes on this format.
>
> This format is legal according to the iSCSI RFC 3720 (e.g.
> http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc3720.html).  See in particular section 12.8.
>>    TargetAddress=domainname[:port][,portal-group-tag]
>>
> The source code for computing the SendTargets response in the
> OpenSolaris iSCSI target is available online.   As far as I can tell,
> the relevant section that creates the SendTargets response is function
> add_target_address in util.c:
> http://src.opensolaris.org/source/xref/onnv/onnv-gate/usr/src/cmd/iscsi/iscsitgtd/util.c#add_target_address
> As you describe, this code always uses the form <ip-address>,<tpgt> ,
> which is the form that you say the HP initiator is having trouble with.
> So as far as OpenSolaris is concerned, there is no current workaround,
> at least at the SendTargets level.
>
> An ideal solution would be for the HP initiator to be upgraded to
> recognize this legal form of TargetAddress response.
>
> As an alternative potential workaround, have you done any
> experimentation with either static discovery or iSNS discovery?  It is
> slightly possible that these alternate discovery methods might go
> through different code paths in the HP initiator that do not object to
> the OpenSolaris response.

According to http://docs.hp.com/en/T1452-90011/ch04s01.html (item 4),
HP-UX supports static target configuration with TPG specified, so
there's some hope (albeit a small one, I believe - I'd be surprised if
negotiation code is target configuration type-specific).

Regards,
Andrey




>
> Peter
>
> Sean Alderman wrote:
>>> There have been numerous OpenSolaris iSCSI target bug
>>> fixes since build
>>> 77.   Whenever you get a chance, it would be
>>> interesting to retry this
>>> experiment with a more recent version of OpenSolaris.
>>>
>>> Peter
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Peter,
>>   Please see my first post in the thread...  I started on OpenSolaris 
>> 2008.05 (svn_86) and recently ran a pkg image-update to bring the server up 
>> to svn_99.  Still no luck.
>>
>>   Unfortunately, our HP-UX systems are a significant reason behind our 
>> attempt to migrate from locally attached storage arrays to iSCSI from a/many 
>> X4500s.  In our test environments we find the need to relocate entire 
>> arrays, while preserving the volume groups on them, from system to system.  
>> iSCSI and the X4500 would be a perfect replacement... if it worked (on the 
>> HP-UX side).  I'm not a big HP-UX fan myself, but we do have a good bit of 
>> it here.  My X4500 goes back to Sun this week, it's an eval unit.
>>
>>
>>> I just loaded an IA64 system with HP-UX specifically
>>> to test iSCSI against our Sun Fire X4500 running
>>> OpenSolaris (svn_99).
>>>
>>> I see the same issue.
>>>
>>> I've had no issues with Linux, Solaris or Windows
>>> initiators connecting to the same server.
>>>
> _______________________________________________
> storage-discuss mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/storage-discuss
>
_______________________________________________
storage-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/storage-discuss

Reply via email to