%FDF-1.2 %âãÏÓ 1 0 obj<<252E377F47B6BE4889549C84253630EB>]/F(/E/T10/OSD2/LetterBallot/osd2r04_LB_master.pdf)>>>> endobj 3 0 obj<> endobj 4 0 obj<
I see both SPC-3 and SPC-4 referenced though out. Which is it?
)/Type/Annot/Popup 3 0 R/Page 0>> endobj 6 0 obj<> endobj 7 0 obj<===Dell=1=ET=UQOACRND=NPYrxx=== \ """Unprocessed Comment""" Global
)/Type/Annot/Popup 6 0 R/Page 0>> endobj 9 0 obj<> endobj 10 0 obj<This needs be be removed before public review.
)/Type/Annot/Popup 9 0 R/Page 2>> endobj 12 0 obj<> endobj 13 0 obj<===LSI=1=ET=UQOACRND=NPYrxx=== &\ quot;""Unprocessed Comment""" Revision History
)/Type/Annot/Popup 12 0 R/Page 2>> endobj 15 0 obj<> endobj 16 0 obj<Should be 2008.
)/Type/Annot/Popup 15 0 R/Page 21>> endobj 18 0 obj<> endobj 19 0 obj<Grammar. Either drop "of" \ or reword the sentence.
)/Type/Annot/Popup 18 0 R/Page 21>> endobj 21 0 obj<> endobj 22 0 obj<===Seagate=1=ET=UQOACRND=NPYrxx===\ 13;"""Unprocessed Comment""" Foreword
)/Type/Annot/Popup 21 0 R/Page 21>> endobj 24 0 obj<> endobj 25 0 obj<===Seagate=2=ET=UQOACRND=NPYrxx===\ 13;"""Unprocessed Comment""" Foreword
)/Type/Annot/Popup 24 0 R/Page 21>> endobj 27 0 obj<> endobj 28 0 obj<SPC-3 s/b SPC-4
)/Type/Annot/Popup 27 0 R/Page 24>> endobj 30 0 obj<> endobj 31 0 obj<===ENDL=1=ET=UACRD=NPYrxx=== &qu\ ot;""Unprocessed Comment""" Global
)/Type/Annot/Popup 30 0 R/Page 24>> endobj 33 0 obj<> endobj 34 0 obj<devices; s/b devices; and
)/Type/Annot/Popup 33 0 R/Page 24>> endobj 36 0 obj<> endobj 37 0 obj<===Dell=2=ET=UQOACRND=NPYrxx=== \ """Unprocessed Comment""" Clause 1, a,b,c list on this page
)/Type/Annot/Popup 36 0 R/Page 24>> endobj 39 0 obj<> endobj 40 0 obj<>)/M(D:20080820182903-05'00')/T(George Penokie)/Subj(Highlight)/QuadPoints[393.79 457.594 430.157 457.594 393.79 446.08 430.157 446.08]/RC(This should be << devices; and >>
)/Type/Annot/Popup 39 0 R/Page 24>> endobj 42 0 obj<> endobj 43 0 obj<===LSI=2=ET=UQOACRND=NPYrxx=== &\ quot;""Unprocessed Comment""" Clause 1, 1st a,b,c list, item c\)
)/Type/Annot/Popup 42 0 R/Page 24>> endobj 45 0 obj<> endobj 46 0 obj<commands; s/b commands; and
)/Type/Annot/Popup 45 0 R/Page 25>> endobj 48 0 obj<> endobj 49 0 obj<===Dell=3=ET=UQOACRND=NPYrxx=== \ """Unprocessed Comment""" Clause 1, a,b,c list on this page
)/Type/Annot/Popup 48 0 R/Page 25>> endobj 51 0 obj<> endobj 52 0 obj<>)/M(D:20080820183516-05'00')/T(George Penokie)/Subj(Highlight)/QuadPoints[193.161 674.613 244.748 674.613 193.161 663.099 244.748 663.099]/RC(This should be << commands; and >>
)/Type/Annot/Popup 51 0 R/Page 25>> endobj 54 0 obj<> endobj 55 0 obj<===LSI=3=ET=UQOACRND=NPYrxx=== &\ quot;""Unprocessed Comment""" Clause 1, 1st a,b,c, list on pg, item c\)
)/Type/Annot/Popup 54 0 R/Page 25>> endobj 57 0 obj<> endobj 58 0 obj<\(global\) ISO/IEC 14776-41\ 3, SCSI Architecture Model - 3 \(SAM-3\) [ANSI INCITS 402-2005] Upgrade all SAM-3 references to SAM-4, since SAM-4 is published.
)/Type/Annot/Popup 57 0 R/Page 26>> endobj 60 0 obj<> endobj 61 0 obj<===HP=1=ET=UQOACRND=NPYrxx=== &q\ uot;""Unprocessed Comment""" 2.2
)/Type/Annot/Popup 60 0 R/Page 26>> endobj 63 0 obj<> endobj 64 0 obj<SAM-4 is close enough to published t\ o move it to normative references
)/Type/Annot/Popup 63 0 R/Page 27>> endobj 66 0 obj<> endobj 67 0 obj<===ENDL=2=ET=UACRD=NPYrxx=== &qu\ ot;""Unprocessed Comment""" 2.5
)/Type/Annot/Popup 66 0 R/Page 27>> endobj 69 0 obj<> endobj 70 0 obj<T10/1731-D s/b ANSI INCITS x\ xx-2008 since SPC-4 is published
)/Type/Annot/Popup 69 0 R/Page 27>> endobj 72 0 obj<> endobj 73 0 obj<T10/1683-D s/b ANSI INCITS x\ xx-2008
)/Type/Annot/Popup 72 0 R/Page 27>> endobj 75 0 obj<> endobj 76 0 obj<===HP=3=ET=UQOACRND=NPYrxx=== &q\ uot;""Unprocessed Comment""" 2.5
)/Type/Annot/Popup 75 0 R/Page 27>> endobj 78 0 obj<> endobj 79 0 obj<===HP=2=ET=UQOACRND=NPYrxx=== &q\ uot;""Unprocessed Comment""" 2.5
)/Type/Annot/Popup 78 0 R/Page 27>> endobj 81 0 obj<> endobj 82 0 obj<SAM-3 s/b SAM-4
)/Type/Annot/Popup 81 0 R/Page 28>> endobj 84 0 obj<> endobj 85 0 obj<Glossary entries that use 'object' i\ n the SAM-3 sense are no longer correct. Reword them.
)/Type/Annot/Popup 84 0 R/Page 28>> endobj 87 0 obj<> endobj 88 0 obj<SCSI tasks seems unlikely to appear \ in the SAM-4 definition of a device server.
)/Type/Annot/Popup 87 0 R/Page 28>> endobj 90 0 obj<> endobj 91 0 obj<===ENDL=3=ET=UACRD=NPYrxx=== &qu\ ot;""Unprocessed Comment""" Global in 3.1
)/Type/Annot/Popup 90 0 R/Page 28>> endobj 93 0 obj<> endobj 94 0 obj<===ENDL=4=ET=UACRD=NPYrxx=== &qu\ ot;""Unprocessed Comment""" Global
)/Type/Annot/Popup 93 0 R/Page 28>> endobj 96 0 obj<> endobj 97 0 obj<===ENDL=5=ET=UACRD=NPYrxx=== &qu\ ot;""Unprocessed Comment""" 3.1.15
)/Type/Annot/Popup 96 0 R/Page 28>> endobj 99 0 obj<> endobj 100 0 obj<Here you talk about a single capability while in 3.1.16 you say "not the first". In credential you may want to say also a capability or several capabilities
)/Type/Annot/Popup 99 0 R/Page 28>> endobj 102 0 obj<> endobj 103 0 obj<===IBM=1=ET=UQOACRND=NPYrxx=== &\ quot;""Unprocessed Comment""" 3.1.11
)/Type/Annot/Popup 102 0 R/Page 28>> endobj 105 0 obj<> endobj 106 0 obj<The definition of object needs to be\ updated to be consistent with the SAM-4 switch to UML.
)/Type/Annot/Popup 105 0 R/Page 29>> endobj 108 0 obj<> endobj 109 0 obj<===ENDL=6=ET=UACRD=NPYrxx=== &qu\ ot;""Unprocessed Comment""" 3.1.26
)/Type/Annot/Popup 108 0 R/Page 29>> endobj 111 0 obj<> endobj 112 0 obj<What SAM-3 calls a task, SAM-4 calls\ a command. The 'task' definition needs to be restructured to coincide with SAM-4.
)/Type/Annot/Popup 111 0 R/Page 30>> endobj 114 0 obj<> endobj 115 0 obj<===ENDL=7=ET=UACRD=NPYrxx=== &qu\ ot;""Unprocessed Comment""" 3.1.50
)/Type/Annot/Popup 114 0 R/Page 30>> endobj 117 0 obj<> endobj 118 0 obj<The expected keyword must be removed\ , per the decision of the September CAP working group \(minutes in 08-354\).
)/Type/Annot/Popup 117 0 R/Page 32>> endobj 120 0 obj<> endobj 121 0 obj<===Other=1=E=A=PYrxx=== "&q\ uot;"Remove expected keyword""" 3.3.1
)/Type/Annot/Popup 120 0 R/Page 32>> endobj 123 0 obj<> endobj 124 0 obj<the use of term object is somewhat confusing here \(as we talk about storage objects\). You may want to consider "modules" or something else
)/Type/Annot/Popup 123 0 R/Page 35>> endobj 126 0 obj<> endobj 127 0 obj<===IBM=2=ET=UQOACRND=NPYrxx=== &\ quot;""Unprocessed Comment""" 3.7.2
)/Type/Annot/Popup 126 0 R/Page 35>> endobj 129 0 obj<> endobj 130 0 obj<Task Priority s/b Command Priority \ [per SAM-4]
)/Type/Annot/Popup 129 0 R/Page 37>> endobj 132 0 obj<> endobj 133 0 obj<===ENDL=8=ET=UACRD=NPYrxx=== &qu\ ot;""Unprocessed Comment""" 4.1
)/Type/Annot/Popup 132 0 R/Page 37>> endobj 135 0 obj<> endobj 136 0 obj<Task Priority s/b Command Pr\ iority to match final version of sam4
)/Type/Annot/Popup 135 0 R/Page 37>> endobj 138 0 obj<> endobj 139 0 obj<response to an INQUIRY command s\ /b the standard INQUIRY data
)/Type/Annot/Popup 138 0 R/Page 37>> endobj 141 0 obj<> endobj 142 0 obj<===HP=4=ET=UQOACRND=NPYrxx=== &q\ uot;""Unprocessed Comment""" 4.1
)/Type/Annot/Popup 141 0 R/Page 37>> endobj 144 0 obj<> endobj 145 0 obj<===HP=5=ET=UQOACRND=NPYrxx=== &q\ uot;""Unprocessed Comment""" 4.2
)/Type/Annot/Popup 144 0 R/Page 37>> endobj 147 0 obj<> endobj 148 0 obj<Delete and
)/Type/Annot/Popup 147 0 R/Page 38>> endobj 150 0 obj<> endobj 151 0 obj<> endobj 153 0 obj<> endobj 154 0 obj<disc drives s/b disk drives&\ #13; Only Seagate spells it "disc"
)/Type/Annot/Popup 153 0 R/Page 39>> endobj 156 0 obj<> endobj 157 0 obj<share directly access does \ not parse
)/Type/Annot/Popup 156 0 R/Page 39>> endobj 159 0 obj<> endobj 160 0 obj<possibly s/b possibly the \ span>
)/Type/Annot/Popup 159 0 R/Page 39>> endobj 162 0 obj<> endobj 163 0 obj<initiator devices s/b SCSI i\ nitiator devices also in figure 3
)/Type/Annot/Popup 162 0 R/Page 39>> endobj 165 0 obj<> endobj 166 0 obj<application clients place s/b\ 3;that application clients place
)/Type/Annot/Popup 165 0 R/Page 39>> endobj 168 0 obj<> endobj 169 0 obj<===HP=10=ET=UQOACRND=NPYrxx=== &\ quot;""Unprocessed Comment""" 4.4, 1st a,b,c list
)/Type/Annot/Popup 168 0 R/Page 39>> endobj 171 0 obj<> endobj 172 0 obj<===HP=7=ET=UQOACRND=NPYrxx=== &q\ uot;""Unprocessed Comment""" 4.4, 1 p after figure 3
)/Type/Annot/Popup 171 0 R/Page 39>> endobj 174 0 obj<> endobj 175 0 obj<===HP=8=ET=UQOACRND=NPYrxx=== &q\ uot;""Unprocessed Comment""" 4.4, 2nd p after figure 3, s 1
)/Type/Annot/Popup 174 0 R/Page 39>> endobj 177 0 obj<> endobj 178 0 obj<===HP=9=ET=UQOACRND=NPYrxx=== &q\ uot;""Unprocessed Comment""" 4.4, 2nd p after figure 3, s 2
)/Type/Annot/Popup 177 0 R/Page 39>> endobj 180 0 obj<> endobj 181 0 obj<===HP=11=ET=UQOACRND=NPYrxx=== &\ quot;""Unprocessed Comment""" 4.4, 3rd p after figure 3, s 1
)/Type/Annot/Popup 180 0 R/Page 39>> endobj 183 0 obj<> endobj 184 0 obj<OBSD \(see 3.1.27\) logical unit \ ;s/b OSD logical unit That's the phrase used in the next sentence, among other places
)/Type/Annot/Popup 183 0 R/Page 40>> endobj 186 0 obj<> endobj 187 0 obj<This OSD object s/b This typ\ e of OSD object since there may be more than one. As written, it sounds like there is just one.
)/Type/Annot/Popup 186 0 R/Page 40>> endobj 189 0 obj<> endobj 190 0 obj<This OSD object s/b This typ\ e of OSD object since there may be more than one. As written, it sounds like there is just one.
)/Type/Annot/Popup 189 0 R/Page 40>> endobj 192 0 obj<> endobj 193 0 obj<This OSD object s/b This typ\ e of OSD object since there may be more than one. As written, it sounds like there is just one.
)/Type/Annot/Popup 192 0 R/Page 40>> endobj 195 0 obj<> endobj 196 0 obj<it s/b the user object
)/Type/Annot/Popup 195 0 R/Page 40>> endobj 198 0 obj<> endobj 199 0 obj<===HP=12=ET=UQOACRND=NPYrxx=== &\ quot;""Unprocessed Comment""" 4.5, p 1, s 1
)/Type/Annot/Popup 198 0 R/Page 40>> endobj 201 0 obj<> endobj 202 0 obj<===HP=13=ET=UQOACRND=NPYrxx=== &\ quot;""Unprocessed Comment""" 4.6.1, b\) Partition
)/Type/Annot/Popup 201 0 R/Page 40>> endobj 204 0 obj<> endobj 205 0 obj<===HP=14=ET=UQOACRND=NPYrxx=== &\ quot;""Unprocessed Comment""" 4.6.1, c\) Collection
)/Type/Annot/Popup 204 0 R/Page 40>> endobj 207 0 obj<> endobj 208 0 obj<===HP=15=ET=UQOACRND=NPYrxx=== &\ quot;""Unprocessed Comment""" 4.6.1, d\) User object
)/Type/Annot/Popup 207 0 R/Page 40>> endobj 210 0 obj<> endobj 211 0 obj<===HP=16=ET=UQOACRND=NPYrxx=== &\ quot;""Unprocessed Comment""" 4.6.1, d\) User object
)/Type/Annot/Popup 210 0 R/Page 40>> endobj 213 0 obj<> endobj 214 0 obj<LBAs are not defined here. You may want to remove the statement that reffers to LBAs \(it contains no information\)
)/Type/Annot/Popup 213 0 R/Page 40>> endobj 216 0 obj<> endobj 217 0 obj<This is hard to parse \(can be parsed ambiguously\)
)/Type/Annot/Popup 216 0 R/Page 40>> endobj 219 0 obj<> endobj 220 0 obj<===IBM=3=ET=UQOACRND=NPYrxx=== &\ quot;""Unprocessed Comment""" 4.5, p 1, s 1
)/Type/Annot/Popup 219 0 R/Page 40>> endobj 222 0 obj<> endobj 223 0 obj<===IBM=4=ET=UQOACRND=NPYrxx=== &\ quot;""Unprocessed Comment""" 4.6.1, ???
)/Type/Annot/Popup 222 0 R/Page 40>> endobj 225 0 obj<> endobj 226 0 obj<>)/M(D:20080820185521-05'00')/T(George Penokie)/Subj(Highlight)/QuadPoints[54.0 636.634 262.818 636.634 54.0 625.12 262.818 625.12]/RC(Change this to << In addition to the sets of objects \(i.e, classes\) defined in SAM-4, this >>
)/Type/Annot/Popup 225 0 R/Page 40>> endobj 228 0 obj<> endobj 229 0 obj<Global - Change all references to SAM-3 to SAM-4.
)/Type/Annot/Popup 228 0 R/Page 40>> endobj 231 0 obj<> endobj 232 0 obj<===LSI=4=ET=UQOACRND=NPYrxx=== &\ quot;""Unprocessed Comment""" Global
)/Type/Annot/Popup 231 0 R/Page 40>> endobj 234 0 obj<> endobj 235 0 obj<===LSI=5=ET=UQOACRND=NPYrxx=== &\ quot;""Unprocessed Comment""" 4.5, p 2
)/Type/Annot/Popup 234 0 R/Page 40>> endobj 237 0 obj<> endobj 238 0 obj<The description of the root object l\ ists several data manipulation commands that are not allowed \(READ, WRITE, APPEND\). There are now other data manipulation commands \(CLEAR and PUNCH\). Should these commands be added to the list? Or, maybe the description should be generalized, such as\ "The device server shall terminate all commands that are defined to manipulate user data \(e.g., READ, WRITE, APPEND, ...\) that are sent to the root object with CHECK CONDITION status, ..."
)/Type/Annot/Popup 237 0 R/Page 41>> endobj 240 0 obj<> endobj 241 0 obj<===Seagate=3=ET=UQOACRND=NPYrxx===\ 13;"""Unprocessed Comment""" 4.6.3, p 2
)/Type/Annot/Popup 240 0 R/Page 41>> endobj 243 0 obj<> endobj 244 0 obj<assigned by s/b are assigned\ by
)/Type/Annot/Popup 243 0 R/Page 41>> endobj 246 0 obj<> endobj 247 0 obj<assigned by s/b are assigned\ by
)/Type/Annot/Popup 246 0 R/Page 41>> endobj 249 0 obj<> endobj 250 0 obj<Footnote a also applies to "wel\ l known collections and "collection or user object", since those rows have multiple Partition_ID values to choose from as well.
)/Type/Annot/Popup 249 0 R/Page 41>> endobj 252 0 obj<> endobj 253 0 obj<===HP=19=ET=UQOACRND=NPYrxx=== &\ quot;""Unprocessed Comment""" 4.6.2, table 3
)/Type/Annot/Popup 252 0 R/Page 41>> endobj 255 0 obj<> endobj 256 0 obj<===HP=17=ET=UQOACRND=NPYrxx=== &\ quot;""Unprocessed Comment""" 4.6.2, table 3
)/Type/Annot/Popup 255 0 R/Page 41>> endobj 258 0 obj<> endobj 259 0 obj<===HP=18=ET=UQOACRND=NPYrxx=== &\ quot;""Unprocessed Comment""" 4.6.2, table 3
)/Type/Annot/Popup 258 0 R/Page 41>> endobj 261 0 obj<> endobj 262 0 obj<There are now other data manipulatio\ n commands \(CLEAR and PUNCH\). Should these commands be added to the list? Or, maybe the description should be generalized, such as "The device server shall terminate all commands that are defined to manipulate user data \(e.g., READ, WRITE, APPEND\ , ...\) that are sent to the partition object with CHECK CONDITION status, ..."
)/Type/Annot/Popup 261 0 R/Page 42>> endobj 264 0 obj<> endobj 265 0 obj<There are now other data manipulatio\ n commands \(CLEAR and PUNCH\). Should these commands be added to the list? Or, maybe the description should be generalized, such as "The device server shall terminate all commands that are defined to manipulate user data \(e.g., READ, WRITE, APPEND\ , ...\) that are sent to the collection object with CHECK CONDITION status, ..."
)/Type/Annot/Popup 264 0 R/Page 42>> endobj 267 0 obj<> endobj 268 0 obj<There are now other data manipulatio\ n commands \(CLEAR and PUNCH\). Should these commands be added to the list? Or, maybe the description should be generalized, such as "The device server shall terminate all commands that are defined to manipulate user data \(e.g., READ, WRITE, APPEND\ , ...\) that are sent to the collection object with CHECK CONDITION status, ..."
)/Type/Annot/Popup 267 0 R/Page 42>> endobj 270 0 obj<> endobj 271 0 obj<===Seagate=4=ET=UQOACRND=NPYrxx===\ 13;"""Unprocessed Comment""" 4.6.4, last p in subclause
)/Type/Annot/Popup 270 0 R/Page 42>> endobj 273 0 obj<> endobj 274 0 obj<> endobj 276 0 obj<> endobj 277 0 obj<===Seagate=6=ET=UQOACRND=NPYrxx===\ 13;"""Unprocessed Comment""" 4.6.6.1, p 6
)/Type/Annot/Popup 276 0 R/Page 42>> endobj 279 0 obj<> endobj 280 0 obj<has to clarify uniqueness within a partition. The "assigned by OSD LU" is a bit confusing \(perhaps explain\)
)/Type/Annot/Popup 279 0 R/Page 42>> endobj 282 0 obj<> endobj 283 0 obj<===IBM=5=ET=UQOACRND=NPYrxx=== &\ quot;""Unprocessed Comment""" 4.6.5, p 1
)/Type/Annot/Popup 282 0 R/Page 42>> endobj 285 0 obj<> endobj 286 0 obj<The "A CREATE USER" and &q\ uot;A REMOVE" cells should be left justified to match the column headers
)/Type/Annot/Popup 285 0 R/Page 43>> endobj 288 0 obj<> endobj 289 0 obj<===HP=20=ET=UQOACRND=NPYrxx=== &\ quot;""Unprocessed Comment""" 4.6.6.3, table 4
)/Type/Annot/Popup 288 0 R/Page 43>> endobj 291 0 obj<> endobj 292 0 obj<Spelling error in "REFERESH&quo\ t;
)/Type/Annot/Popup 291 0 R/Page 44>> endobj 294 0 obj<> endobj 295 0 obj<===Seagate=7=ET=UQOACRND=NPYrxx===\ 13;"""Unprocessed Comment""" 4.6.6.5.3, 1st a,b,c list
)/Type/Annot/Popup 294 0 R/Page 44>> endobj 297 0 obj<> endobj 298 0 obj<which s/b that
)/Type/Annot/Popup 297 0 R/Page 44>> endobj 300 0 obj<> endobj 301 0 obj<REFERESH s/b REFRESH<\ /p>)/Type/Annot/Popup 300 0 R/Page 44>> endobj 303 0 obj<> endobj 304 0 obj<
===HP=21=ET=UQOACRND=NPYrxx=== &\ quot;""Unprocessed Comment""" 4.6.6.5.2, p 1, s 1
)/Type/Annot/Popup 303 0 R/Page 44>> endobj 306 0 obj<> endobj 307 0 obj<===HP=22=ET=UQOACRND=NPYrxx=== &\ quot;""Unprocessed Comment""" 4.6.6.5.3, 1st a,b,c list
)/Type/Annot/Popup 306 0 R/Page 44>> endobj 309 0 obj<> endobj 310 0 obj<a\) s/b 1\) I think
)/Type/Annot/Popup 309 0 R/Page 45>> endobj 312 0 obj<> endobj 313 0 obj<===Dell=4=ET=UQOACRND=NPYrxx=== \ """Unprocessed Comment""" 4.6.6.6, 1st ?,2,3 list in subclause
)/Type/Annot/Popup 312 0 R/Page 45>> endobj 315 0 obj<> endobj 316 0 obj<Spelling error in "REFERESH&quo\ t;
)/Type/Annot/Popup 315 0 R/Page 45>> endobj 318 0 obj<> endobj 319 0 obj<Spelling error in "REFERESH&quo\ t;
)/Type/Annot/Popup 318 0 R/Page 45>> endobj 321 0 obj<> endobj 322 0 obj<Should be "other than TRACKING&\ quot;
)/Type/Annot/Popup 321 0 R/Page 45>> endobj 324 0 obj<> endobj 325 0 obj<Should be "an object"
)/Type/Annot/Popup 324 0 R/Page 45>> endobj 327 0 obj<> endobj 328 0 obj<> endobj 330 0 obj<> endobj 331 0 obj<===Seagate=9=ET=UQOACRND=NPYrxx===\ 13;"""Unprocessed Comment""" 4.6.6.5.3, 1st a,b,c list on pg
)/Type/Annot/Popup 330 0 R/Page 45>> endobj 333 0 obj<> endobj 334 0 obj<===Seagate=10=ET=UQOACRND=NPYrxx===&\ #13;"""Unprocessed Comment""" 4.6.6.6, p 2, s 2
)/Type/Annot/Popup 333 0 R/Page 45>> endobj 336 0 obj<> endobj 337 0 obj<===Seagate=11=ET=UQOACRND=NPYrxx===&\ #13;"""Unprocessed Comment""" 4.6.6.6, p 3, s 1
)/Type/Annot/Popup 336 0 R/Page 45>> endobj 339 0 obj<> endobj 340 0 obj<REFERESH s/b REFRESH
)/Type/Annot/Popup 339 0 R/Page 45>> endobj 342 0 obj<> endobj 343 0 obj<===HP=23=ET=UQOACRND=NPYrxx=== &\ quot;""Unprocessed Comment""" 4.6.6.5.3, 1st a,b,c list on pg
)/Type/Annot/Popup 342 0 R/Page 45>> endobj 345 0 obj<> endobj 346 0 obj<Should be "server"<\ /p>)/Type/Annot/Popup 345 0 R/Page 46>> endobj 348 0 obj<> endobj 349 0 obj<
Wrong reference, should be 5.2.7, no\ t 5.2.5
)/Type/Annot/Popup 348 0 R/Page 46>> endobj 351 0 obj<> endobj 352 0 obj<===Seagate=12=ET=UQOACRND=NPYrxx===&\ #13;"""Unprocessed Comment""" 4.6.6.6, 2nd p after note 2, s 1
)/Type/Annot/Popup 351 0 R/Page 46>> endobj 354 0 obj<> endobj 355 0 obj<===Seagate=13=ET=UQOACRND=NPYrxx===&\ #13;"""Unprocessed Comment""" 4.6.6.6, 1st a,b,c list after note 2
)/Type/Annot/Popup 354 0 R/Page 46>> endobj 357 0 obj<> endobj 358 0 obj<device sever s/b device serv\ er
)/Type/Annot/Popup 357 0 R/Page 46>> endobj 360 0 obj<> endobj 361 0 obj<===HP=24=ET=UQOACRND=NPYrxx=== &\ quot;""Unprocessed Comment""" 4.6.6.6, 2nd p after note 2, s 1
)/Type/Annot/Popup 360 0 R/Page 46>> endobj 363 0 obj<> endobj 364 0 obj<p1 s1 Because of this, it is not\ possible to make a set of objects writeable once the write prohibition has been set. If writing is prohibited, then writing of the object accessibility attribute is prohibited too.
)/Type/Annot/Popup 363 0 R/Page 47>> endobj 366 0 obj<> endobj 367 0 obj<After write access to an object has\ been denied, there appears to be no way to use a command to restore that access.
)/Type/Annot/Popup 366 0 R/Page 47>> endobj 369 0 obj<> endobj 370 0 obj<===ENDL=9=ET=UACRD=NPYrxx=== &qu\ ot;""Unprocessed Comment""" 4.7
)/Type/Annot/Popup 369 0 R/Page 47>> endobj 372 0 obj<> endobj 373 0 obj<This notation is not defined until s\ ection 4.8.5
)/Type/Annot/Popup 372 0 R/Page 47>> endobj 375 0 obj<> endobj 376 0 obj<===Seagate=14=ET=UQOACRND=NPYrxx===&\ #13;"""Unprocessed Comment""" 4.6.6.6, table 6
)/Type/Annot/Popup 375 0 R/Page 47>> endobj 378 0 obj<> endobj 379 0 obj<===ENDL=26=ET=UQOACRND=NPYrxx=== \ ;"""Unprocessed Comment""" 4.7, p 1, s 1
)/Type/Annot/Popup 378 0 R/Page 47>> endobj 381 0 obj<> endobj 382 0 obj<States that the denial of write acce\ ss to an object with members means denial of the ability to create new members in that object. It should also deny the ability to remove member objects.
)/Type/Annot/Popup 381 0 R/Page 48>> endobj 384 0 obj<> endobj 385 0 obj<Once the object accessibility attrib\ ute is set to 1, can it be set to zero? Seems like this write protects the object AND ATTRIBUTES, preventing it from being set back to 0. That is, once an object is made read-only, it cannot be reverted back to read/write mode.
)/Type/Annot/Popup 384 0 R/Page 48>> endobj 387 0 obj<> endobj 388 0 obj<===Seagate=15=ET=UQOACRND=NPYrxx===&\ #13;"""Unprocessed Comment""" 4.7, 2nd p before table 7
)/Type/Annot/Popup 387 0 R/Page 48>> endobj 390 0 obj<> endobj 391 0 obj<===Seagate=16=ET=UQOACRND=NPYrxx===&\ #13;"""Unprocessed Comment""" 4.7, 1st p before table 7
)/Type/Annot/Popup 390 0 R/Page 48>> endobj 393 0 obj<> endobj 394 0 obj<Should be "associated with each\ "
)/Type/Annot/Popup 393 0 R/Page 49>> endobj 396 0 obj<> endobj 397 0 obj<It is inconsistent that this paragra\ ph indicates that multi-object commands can retrieve or store attributes to multiple objects, while table 6 indicates that only the GET and SET MEMBER OBJECTS command can do this.
)/Type/Annot/Popup 396 0 R/Page 49>> endobj 399 0 obj<> endobj 400 0 obj<===Seagate=17=ET=UQOACRND=NPYrxx===&\ #13;"""Unprocessed Comment""" 4.8.1, 4th p on pg, s 2
)/Type/Annot/Popup 399 0 R/Page 49>> endobj 402 0 obj<> endobj 403 0 obj<===Seagate=18=ET=UQOACRND=NPYrxx===&\ #13;"""Unprocessed Comment""" 4.8.1, 4th p on pg, s 2
)/Type/Annot/Popup 402 0 R/Page 49>> endobj 405 0 obj<> endobj 406 0 obj<with
)/Type/Annot/Popup 405 0 R/Page 49>> endobj 408 0 obj<> endobj 409 0 obj<===IBM=6=ET=UQOACRND=NPYrxx=== &\ quot;""Unprocessed Comment""" 4.8.1, 4th p on pg, s 2
)/Type/Annot/Popup 408 0 R/Page 49>> endobj 411 0 obj<> endobj 412 0 obj<The error conditions described in su\ bparagraphs "a" and "b" refer to an "invalid attribute length". This is not relevant to the error being described. The error is the attribute number.
)/Type/Annot/Popup 411 0 R/Page 53>> endobj 414 0 obj<> endobj 415 0 obj<===Seagate=19=ET=UQOACRND=NPYrxx===&\ #13;"""Unprocessed Comment""" 4.8.6, p 3 w/ its a,b,c list
)/Type/Annot/Popup 414 0 R/Page 53>> endobj 417 0 obj<> endobj 418 0 obj<i don't like the marked paragraph si\ nce it seems to imply that data must be read or written by the device sequentially, and that's not what higher performance disks do today. for example, if you send a disk a full track write, it will typically start writing with whatever sector happens\ to passing under the head \(once the head reaches the appropriate track\). it doesn't wait for the first sector of the write to appear. bad block re-vectoring has a similar effect. if the 3rd sector in a write has been re-vectored, it will be read or\ written after the other sectors in the read or write. so an i/o error may not be detected until all sectors other than the failed one have been transferred. we can say that the atomicity guarantees affect the boundaries of how much data is affected b\ y a media error detected when an operation is in progress \(presumably the media error will occur at an atomic i/o boundary\), but that's about it. note that neither of the last two paragraphs really requires any particular behavior.
\ )/Type/Annot/Popup 417 0 R/Page 54>> endobj 420 0 obj<> endobj 421 0 obj<===Symantec=1=ET=QOACRND=NPYrxx===\ 13;"""Sequential read/write implication""" 4.9.2, p 2
)/Type/Annot/Popup 420 0 R/Page 54>> endobj 423 0 obj<> endobj 424 0 obj<\(see 4.11.3.1\); s/b \(see 4.11.3.1\); and
)/Type/Annot/Popup 423 0 R/Page 58>> endobj 426 0 obj<> endobj 427 0 obj<===Dell=5=ET=UQOACRND=NPYrxx=== \ """Unprocessed Comment""" 4.11.1, list entry B\)
)/Type/Annot/Popup 426 0 R/Page 58>> endobj 429 0 obj<> endobj 430 0 obj<conditions\( add space
)/Type/Annot/Popup 429 0 R/Page 58>> endobj 432 0 obj<> endobj 433 0 obj<===HP=25=ET=UQOACRND=NPYrxx=== &\ quot;""Unprocessed Comment""" 4.11.1, list entry C\)
)/Type/Annot/Popup 432 0 R/Page 58>> endobj 435 0 obj<> endobj 436 0 obj<I think that this formulation is problematic. I would like to see a clause that says that at least the effected changes are reflected in results \(sense?\)
)/Type/Annot/Popup 435 0 R/Page 60>> endobj 438 0 obj<> endobj 439 0 obj<===IBM=7=ET=UQOACRND=NPYrxx=== &\ quot;""Unprocessed Comment""" 4.11.2.2.1, 1st p on pg
)/Type/Annot/Popup 438 0 R/Page 60>> endobj 441 0 obj<> endobj 442 0 obj<Leave a space between sentences.
)/Type/Annot/Popup 441 0 R/Page 67>> endobj 444 0 obj<> endobj 445 0 obj<===Seagate=20=ET=UQOACRND=NPYrxx===&\ #13;"""Unprocessed Comment""" 4.11.2.2.4, p 1, s 1 & s 2
)/Type/Annot/Popup 444 0 R/Page 67>> endobj 447 0 obj<> endobj 448 0 obj<Shouldn't this require CREATE and WR\ ITE permission bits for destination?
)/Type/Annot/Popup 447 0 R/Page 69>> endobj 450 0 obj<> endobj 451 0 obj<Shouldn't this require CREATE and WR\ ITE permission bits for destination?
)/Type/Annot/Popup 450 0 R/Page 69>> endobj 453 0 obj<> endobj 454 0 obj<Shouldn't this require CREATE and WR\ ITE permission bits for destination?
)/Type/Annot/Popup 453 0 R/Page 69>> endobj 456 0 obj<> endobj 457 0 obj<===Seagate=21=ET=UQOACRND=NPYrxx===&\ #13;"""Unprocessed Comment""" 4.11.2.3, table 25, CREATE CLONE row
)/Type/Annot/Popup 456 0 R/Page 69>> endobj 459 0 obj<> endobj 460 0 obj<===Seagate=22=ET=QOACRND=NPYrxx===\ 13;"""Create permission for CREATE CLONE""" 4.11.2.3, table 25, CREATE CLONE row
)/Type/Annot/Popup 459 0 R/Page 69>> endobj 462 0 obj<> endobj 463 0 obj<===Seagate=23=ET=OACRND=NPYrxx===\ 3;"""Create permission for CREATE SNAPSHOT""" 4.11.2.3, table 25, CREATE SNAPSHOT row
)/Type/Annot/Popup 462 0 R/Page 69>> endobj 465 0 obj<> endobj 466 0 obj<Why is this APPEND and not WRITE?
)/Type/Annot/Popup 465 0 R/Page 71>> endobj 468 0 obj<> endobj 469 0 obj<===Seagate=24=ET=QOACRND=NPYrxx===\ 13;"""Why Append permission for REFRESH""" 4.11.2.3, table 25, REFRESH SNAPSHOT OR CLONE row
)/Type/Annot/Popup 468 0 R/Page 71>> endobj 471 0 obj<> endobj 472 0 obj<Looks like READ and WRITE are swappe\ d here. Main partition should be WRITE and snapshot partition should be READ for the RESTORE PARTITION command.
)/Type/Annot/Popup 471 0 R/Page 72>> endobj 474 0 obj<> endobj 475 0 obj<===Seagate=25=ET=UQOACRND=NPYrxx===&\ #13;"""Unprocessed Comment""" 4.11.2.3, table 25, RESTORE PARTITION FROM SNAPSHOT row
)/Type/Annot/Popup 474 0 R/Page 72>> endobj 477 0 obj<> endobj 478 0 obj<The first rows indicate that the GET\ _ATTR bit is required to get attribute from the Current Command Page. The description of GET_ATTR in 4.11.2.2.1 specifically says that GET_ATTR is NOT required to access the Current Command Page attributes \(see page 39, 3rd paragraph\).
)/Type/Annot/Popup 477 0 R/Page 73>> endobj 480 0 obj<> endobj 481 0 obj<The first rows indicate that the GET\ _ATTR bit is required to get attribute from the Current Command Page. The description of GET_ATTR in 4.11.2.2.1 specifically says that GET_ATTR is NOT required to access the Current Command Page attributes \(see page 39, 3rd paragraph\).
)/Type/Annot/Popup 480 0 R/Page 73>> endobj 483 0 obj<> endobj 484 0 obj<The first rows indicate that the GET\ _ATTR bit is required to get attribute from the Current Command Page. The description of GET_ATTR in 4.11.2.2.1 specifically says that GET_ATTR is NOT required to access the Current Command Page attributes \(see page 39, 3rd paragraph\).
)/Type/Annot/Popup 483 0 R/Page 73>> endobj 486 0 obj<> endobj 487 0 obj<===Seagate=26=ET=QOACRND=NPYrxx===\ 13;"""Current Command attributes page permission bits requirements""" 4.11.2.3, table 26, USER retrieve from Current Command page row
)/Type/Annot/Popup 486 0 R/Page 73>> endobj 489 0 obj<> endobj 490 0 obj<===Seagate=27=ET=OACRND=NPYrxx===\ 3;"""Current Command attributes page permission bits requirements""" 4.11.2.3, table 26, COLLECTION retrieve from Current Command page row
)/Type/Annot/Popup 489 0 R/Page 73>> endobj 492 0 obj<> endobj 493 0 obj<===Seagate=28=ET=OACRND=NPYrxx===\ 3;"""Current Command attributes page permission bits requirements""" 4.11.2.3, table 26, PARTITION/ROOT retrieve from Current Command page row
)/Type/Annot/Popup 492 0 R/Page 73>> endobj 495 0 obj<> endobj 496 0 obj<Bad grammar: "established affec\ ted...".
)/Type/Annot/Popup 495 0 R/Page 76>> endobj 498 0 obj<> endobj 499 0 obj<===Seagate=29=ET=UQOACRND=NPYrxx===&\ #13;"""Unprocessed Comment""" 4.11.3.1, 1st B\) on pg
)/Type/Annot/Popup 498 0 R/Page 76>> endobj 501 0 obj<> endobj 502 0 obj<With snapshots allowing partitions t\ o share parts of there data, it is more likely that an error will affect multiple partitions. For c\) A\) c\), it may be worth reporting all affected Partition_IDs rather than just one, or the extent of damage will be unclear.
)/Type/Annot/Popup 501 0 R/Page 76>> endobj 504 0 obj<> endobj 505 0 obj<===HP=26=ET=QOACRND=NPYrxx=== &q\ uot;""Data sharing and error recovery""" 4.11.3.1
)/Type/Annot/Popup 504 0 R/Page 76>> endobj 507 0 obj<> endobj 508 0 obj<The OBJECT STRUCTURE CHECK command s\ hould be included in the list of allowed commands.
)/Type/Annot/Popup 507 0 R/Page 78>> endobj 510 0 obj<> endobj 511 0 obj<===Seagate=30=ET=UQOACRND=NPYrxx===&\ #13;"""Unprocessed Comment""" 4.11.3.3, 1st a,b,c list on pg
)/Type/Annot/Popup 510 0 R/Page 78>> endobj 513 0 obj<> endobj 514 0 obj<that statement is not completely correct. I would state it that"as a result of the communications between SM and client the client should be able to build a capability and should have the cap-key. The rest of the text c\ alls a combination of those two a credential and uses for it a data-structure similar to those used in communications with the data server for ease of illustration"
)/Type/Annot/Popup 513 0 R/Page 79>> endobj 516 0 obj<> endobj 517 0 obj<===IBM=8=ET=UQOACRND=NPYrxx=== &\ quot;""Unprocessed Comment""" 4.12.1, last p on pg
)/Type/Annot/Popup 516 0 R/Page 79>> endobj 519 0 obj<> endobj 520 0 obj<Delete extra "and" in a,b,\ c list
)/Type/Annot/Popup 519 0 R/Page 80>> endobj 522 0 obj<> endobj 523 0 obj<===Dell=6=ET=UQOACRND=NPYrxx=== \ """Unprocessed Comment""" 4.12.1, 1st a,b,c list on pg
)/Type/Annot/Popup 522 0 R/Page 80>> endobj 525 0 obj<> endobj 526 0 obj<Bad grammar, missing word\(s\).
)/Type/Annot/Popup 525 0 R/Page 80>> endobj 528 0 obj<> endobj 529 0 obj<===Seagate=31=ET=UQOACRND=NPYrxx===&\ #13;"""Unprocessed Comment""" 4.12.1, 2nd p on pg, s 2
)/Type/Annot/Popup 528 0 R/Page 80>> endobj 531 0 obj<> endobj 532 0 obj<mising "is"
)/Type/Annot/Popup 531 0 R/Page 80>> endobj 534 0 obj<> endobj 535 0 obj<===IBM=9=ET=UQOACRND=NPYrxx=== &\ quot;""Unprocessed Comment""" 4.12.1, 2nd p on pg, s 2
)/Type/Annot/Popup 534 0 R/Page 80>> endobj 537 0 obj<> endobj 538 0 obj<should mention that only cap-keys have to be confidential
)/Type/Annot/Popup 537 0 R/Page 81>> endobj 540 0 obj<> endobj 541 0 obj<===IBM=10=ET=UQOACRND=NPYrxx=== \ """Unprocessed Comment""" 4.12.2, table 28
)/Type/Annot/Popup 540 0 R/Page 81>> endobj 543 0 obj<> endobj 544 0 obj<This should be "authorized"\ ;, not "unauthorized".
)/Type/Annot/Popup 543 0 R/Page 84>> endobj 546 0 obj<> endobj 547 0 obj<===Seagate=32=ET=UQOACRND=NPYrxx===&\ #13;"""Unprocessed Comment""" 4.12.4.1, table 30, footnote d
)/Type/Annot/Popup 546 0 R/Page 84>> endobj 549 0 obj<> endobj 550 0 obj<Grammar: drop the word "contain\ s"
)/Type/Annot/Popup 549 0 R/Page 87>> endobj 552 0 obj<> endobj 553 0 obj<===Seagate=33=ET=UQOACRND=NPYrxx===&\ #13;"""Unprocessed Comment""" 4.12.4.5, 1st p on pg
)/Type/Annot/Popup 552 0 R/Page 87>> endobj 555 0 obj<> endobj 556 0 obj<Grammar: repeated words "in the\ in the".
)/Type/Annot/Popup 555 0 R/Page 95>> endobj 558 0 obj<> endobj 559 0 obj<===Seagate=34=ET=UQOACRND=NPYrxx===&\ #13;"""Unprocessed Comment""" 4.12.6.3.2, 2nd B\) on pg
)/Type/Annot/Popup 558 0 R/Page 95>> endobj 561 0 obj<> endobj 562 0 obj<A flow diagram of the checks might help a lot the reader and perhaps replace the text
)/Type/Annot/Popup 561 0 R/Page 97>> endobj 564 0 obj<> endobj 565 0 obj<===IBM=11=ET=UQOACRND=NPYrxx=== \ """Unprocessed Comment""" 4.12.7.2, last p in subclause
)/Type/Annot/Popup 564 0 R/Page 97>> endobj 567 0 obj<> endobj 568 0 obj<QUERY TASK s/b QUERY TASK, QUERY TA\ SK SET, and QUERY ASYNCHRONOUS EVENT
)/Type/Annot/Popup 567 0 R/Page 101>> endobj 570 0 obj<> endobj 571 0 obj<===ENDL=10=ET=UACRD=NPYrxx=== &q\ uot;""Unprocessed Comment""" 4.12.10, p3, s1
)/Type/Annot/Popup 570 0 R/Page 101>> endobj 573 0 obj<> endobj 574 0 obj<[insert the following at the end of \ this text] For snapshots, this indicates a primary or clone partition, and for clones this indicates a snapshot partition. ... clones may have a primary or snapshot partion as their source and snapshots may have a primary or clone partion. i'v\ e added words to indicate that.
)/Type/Annot/Popup 573 0 R/Page 102>> endobj 576 0 obj<> endobj 577 0 obj<===Symantec=7=ET=UQOACRND=NPYrxx===&\ #13;"""Unprocessed Comment""" 4.13.2.1, table 36, 2nd to last row
)/Type/Annot/Popup 576 0 R/Page 102>> endobj 579 0 obj<> endobj 580 0 obj<Replace the word "show" wi\ th "shown"
)/Type/Annot/Popup 579 0 R/Page 103>> endobj 582 0 obj<> endobj 583 0 obj<===Seagate=35=ET=UQOACRND=NPYrxx===&\ #13;"""Unprocessed Comment""" 4.13.2.2, 1st p on pg
)/Type/Annot/Popup 582 0 R/Page 103>> endobj 585 0 obj<> endobj 586 0 obj<SHAPSHOT s/b SNAPSHOT\
)/Type/Annot/Popup 585 0 R/Page 107>> endobj 588 0 obj<> endobj 589 0 obj<===HP=27=ET=UQOACRND=NPYrxx=== &\ quot;""Unprocessed Comment""" 4.13.2.4, p 1
)/Type/Annot/Popup 588 0 R/Page 107>> endobj 591 0 obj<> endobj 592 0 obj<device sever s/b device serv\ er
)/Type/Annot/Popup 591 0 R/Page 109>> endobj 594 0 obj<> endobj 595 0 obj<Delete the
)/Type/Annot/Popup 594 0 R/Page 109>> endobj 597 0 obj<> endobj 598 0 obj<===HP=28=ET=UQOACRND=NPYrxx=== &\ quot;""Unprocessed Comment""" 4.13.3, table 43, DO NOT CARE row
)/Type/Annot/Popup 597 0 R/Page 109>> endobj 600 0 obj<> endobj 601 0 obj<===HP=29=ET=UQOACRND=NPYrxx=== &\ quot;""Unprocessed Comment""" 4.13.3, 2nd p after table 43
)/Type/Annot/Popup 600 0 R/Page 109>> endobj 603 0 obj<> endobj 604 0 obj<it's not clear to me how loose this \ is intended to be. is there a requirement that the duplicated object be a snapshot or not? in my view, a "snapshot" would represent the state of the source object at *some* point in the past, but i don't think this statement makes that a require\ ment. for example, on UNIX/LINUX systems if you copy a file that's being written to in a random fashion \(say start of file, end of file, start of file, end of file, ...\) using the cp command: # cp busyfile busyfile_copy the copy will consist of \ data that was in the source object at some point in time, but not all of the data will have been present at the same point in time \(you'll get some of the writes to the end of the file, but not the corresponding writes to the beginning of the file\). \ ;i suggest that we clarify this and \(possibly\) add another Time of Duplication method such that one is "snapshot corresponds to the contents of the source object at some point in time while the copy operation was in progress", and DO NOT CARE \ is "snapshot may not correspond to any point in time".
)/Type/Annot/Popup 603 0 R/Page 110>> endobj 606 0 obj<> endobj 607 0 obj<in the case where the object is dupl\ icated using one of the above [see comment Symantec 5] methods \(either DO NOT CARE or the new one that i suggested\), is it reasonable to expect that the timestamps in the duplicated object will indicate the exact time that the copy occurred? we shou\ ld probably specify the behavior one way or the other. my preference, is for the object time stamp to represent the exact time that the copy occurred \(assuming the copy is consistent\).
)/Type/Annot/Popup 606 0 R/Page 110>> endobj 609 0 obj<> endobj 610 0 obj<===Symantec=6=ET=QOACRND=NPYrxx===\ 13;"""Time of Duplication DO NOT CARE""" 4.13.4.2, table 44, DO NOT CARE row
)/Type/Annot/Popup 609 0 R/Page 110>> endobj 612 0 obj<> endobj 613 0 obj<===Symantec=5=ET=QOACRND=NPYrxx===\ 13;"""Time of Duplication DO NOT CARE""" 4.13.4.2, table 44, DO NOT CARE row
)/Type/Annot/Popup 612 0 R/Page 110>> endobj 615 0 obj<> endobj 616 0 obj<reported as deferred errors \(see SP\ C-3\) s/b handled as described in 4.11.3.
)/Type/Annot/Popup 615 0 R/Page 111>> endobj 618 0 obj<> endobj 619 0 obj<===ENDL=11=ET=UACRD=NPYrxx=== &q\ uot;""Unprocessed Comment""" 4.14, p 4, s 2
)/Type/Annot/Popup 618 0 R/Page 111>> endobj 621 0 obj<> endobj 622 0 obj<Should OSD add an FUA_NV bit to dist\ inguish between these data locations: FUA: data is safe on the medium. \(if the OSD controller is using disk drives as its medium, the disk drives can be moved to another OSD controller\) FUA_NV: data is safe either in NV cache or on the medi\ um. \(disk drives cannot be moved without also moving the NV cache\)
)/Type/Annot/Popup 621 0 R/Page 111>> endobj 624 0 obj<> endobj 625 0 obj<===HP=30=ET=UQOACRND=NPYrxx=== &\ quot;""Unprocessed Comment""" 4.14
)/Type/Annot/Popup 624 0 R/Page 111>> endobj 627 0 obj<> endobj 628 0 obj<should not say something about "no space" as opposed to quota exhaustion.
)/Type/Annot/Popup 627 0 R/Page 111>> endobj 630 0 obj<> endobj 631 0 obj<===IBM=12=ET=UQOACRND=NPYrxx=== \ """Unprocessed Comment""" 4.13.5, 1st p on pg
)/Type/Annot/Popup 630 0 R/Page 111>> endobj 633 0 obj<> endobj 634 0 obj<SPC-4 subclause 4.5.1 defines except\ ions that make this "all errors" statement invalid. Resolve the conflict between OSD-2 and SPC-4.
)/Type/Annot/Popup 633 0 R/Page 116>> endobj 636 0 obj<> endobj 637 0 obj<I believe that 4.11.3 defines the er\ ror recovery mechanism for errors that occur after a command has completed, and the mechanism does not involve deferred error reporting.
)/Type/Annot/Popup 636 0 R/Page 116>> endobj 639 0 obj<> endobj 640 0 obj<===ENDL=12=ET=UACRD=NPYrxx=== &q\ uot;""Unprocessed Comment""" 4.16.1, p 1, s 1
)/Type/Annot/Popup 639 0 R/Page 116>> endobj 642 0 obj<> endobj 643 0 obj<===ENDL=13=ET=UACRD=NPYrxx=== &q\ uot;""Unprocessed Comment""" 4.16.1, last p
)/Type/Annot/Popup 642 0 R/Page 116>> endobj 645 0 obj<> endobj 646 0 obj<This is no longer true. OSD-2 \(sect\ ion 4.11.3\) defines a new exception management mechanism that should take care of deferred errors.
)/Type/Annot/Popup 645 0 R/Page 116>> endobj 648 0 obj<> endobj 649 0 obj<Marked set by IrenS
)/StateModel(Marked)/Type/Annot/Popup 648 0 R/Page 116>> endobj 651 0 obj<> endobj 652 0 obj<===Seagate=36=ET=UQOACRND=NPYrxx===&\ #13;"""Unprocessed Comment""" 4.16.1, last p
)/Type/Annot/Popup 651 0 R/Page 116>> endobj 654 0 obj<> endobj 655 0 obj<Marked set by IrenS [Acrobat overhea\ d from FDF file]
)/Type/Annot/Popup 654 0 R/Page 116>> endobj 657 0 obj<> endobj 658 0 obj<===Seagate=37=E=N=N=== "&qu\ ot;"Acrobat Overhead Comment""" 4.16.1, last p
)/Type/Annot/Popup 657 0 R/Page 116>> endobj 660 0 obj<> endobj 661 0 obj<OSD logical units shall use descript\ or format sense data \(see SPC-3\) to report all errors. While the intent is admirable, this is a bit too aggressive \(like SAT-2's attempt to mandate descriptor format for the ATA PASS-THROUGH commands\). 1. OSD ought to honor the D_S\ ENSE bit in the Control mode page. If fixed format is requested, then return very abbreviated \(almost useless\) fixed-format data rather than return another format. 2. SAM-4/SPC-4 require that fixed format be used to report reset unit attention\ conditions and the codes needed to run MODE SELECT to turn on fixed-format, so old software just doesn't get confused
)/Type/Annot/Popup 660 0 R/Page 116>> endobj 663 0 obj<> endobj 664 0 obj<===HP=31=ET=UQOACRND=NPYrxx=== &\ quot;""Unprocessed Comment""" 4.16.1, p 1, s 1
)/Type/Annot/Popup 663 0 R/Page 116>> endobj 666 0 obj<> endobj 667 0 obj<are all references consistently to SPC3 or SPC4
)/Type/Annot/Popup 666 0 R/Page 116>> endobj 669 0 obj<> endobj 670 0 obj<===IBM=13=ET=UQOACRND=NPYrxx=== \ """Unprocessed Comment""" 4.16.1, last p
)/Type/Annot/Popup 669 0 R/Page 116>> endobj 672 0 obj<> endobj 673 0 obj<before the task containing that comm\ and enters the enabled task state s/b before the command enters the enabled command state [per SAM-4]
)/Type/Annot/Popup 672 0 R/Page 121>> endobj 675 0 obj<> endobj 676 0 obj<===ENDL=14=ET=UACRD=NPYrxx=== &q\ uot;""Unprocessed Comment""" 4.17, 2nd p before table 58
)/Type/Annot/Popup 675 0 R/Page 121>> endobj 678 0 obj<> endobj 679 0 obj<The structure of the operation code \ field is described in SPC-4, not SAM-4
)/Type/Annot/Popup 678 0 R/Page 123>> endobj 681 0 obj<> endobj 682 0 obj<===ENDL=15=ET=UACRD=NPYrxx=== &q\ uot;""Unprocessed Comment""" 5.1, p 3
)/Type/Annot/Popup 681 0 R/Page 123>> endobj 684 0 obj<> endobj 685 0 obj<States that Additional CDB Length sh\ ould be 216. The table says it should be 228.
)/Type/Annot/Popup 684 0 R/Page 123>> endobj 687 0 obj<> endobj 688 0 obj<===Seagate=38=ET=UQOACRND=NPYrxx===&\ #13;"""Unprocessed Comment""" 5.1, 1st p after table 59, s 2
)/Type/Annot/Popup 687 0 R/Page 123>> endobj 690 0 obj<> endobj 691 0 obj<216 s/b 228 to mat\ ch the value in table 59. May be better to say "the value specified in table 59" to avoid this problem.
)/Type/Annot/Popup 690 0 R/Page 123>> endobj 693 0 obj<> endobj 694 0 obj<===HP=32=ET=UQOACRND=NPYrxx=== &\ quot;""Unprocessed Comment""" 5.1, 1st p after table 59, s 2
)/Type/Annot/Popup 693 0 R/Page 123>> endobj 696 0 obj<> endobj 697 0 obj<Can we use a defined verb \(shall/sh\ ould\) instead of "is"?
)/Type/Annot/Popup 696 0 R/Page 125>> endobj 699 0 obj<> endobj 700 0 obj<===Seagate=39=ET=UQOACRND=NPYrxx===&\ #13;"""Unprocessed Comment""" 5.2.4, p 1, s 1
)/Type/Annot/Popup 699 0 R/Page 125>> endobj 702 0 obj<> endobj 703 0 obj<The definition of DPO in 4.14 and 5.\ 2.3 is a bit misleading - it sounds like a weak "should" version of FUA, advising the device server to not put data in the cache. Really, DPO signals that the application client does not expect to read the data again, so the device serv\ er need not retain the data in the cache in hopes of a cache hit on a read. To maintain reasonable write performance, however, it is important that the device server temporarily put the data in its cache, performing the write to medium when conve\ nient. DPO should not cause a drop to the FUA level of performance.
)/Type/Annot/Popup 702 0 R/Page 125>> endobj 705 0 obj<> endobj 706 0 obj<ADDITIONAL LENGTH s/b smallc\ aps
)/Type/Annot/Popup 705 0 R/Page 125>> endobj 708 0 obj<> endobj 709 0 obj<===HP=34=ET=UQOACRND=NPYrxx=== &\ quot;""Unprocessed Comment""" 5.2.2, p 2, s 2
)/Type/Annot/Popup 708 0 R/Page 125>> endobj 711 0 obj<> endobj 712 0 obj<===HP=33=ET=UQOACRND=NPYrxx=== &\ quot;""Unprocessed Comment""" 5.2.3, p 1
)/Type/Annot/Popup 711 0 R/Page 125>> endobj 714 0 obj<> endobj 715 0 obj<mention table at 172?
)/Type/Annot/Popup 714 0 R/Page 125>> endobj 717 0 obj<> endobj 718 0 obj<===IBM=14=ET=UQOACRND=NPYrxx=== \ """Unprocessed Comment""" 5.2.2, p 2, s 2
)/Type/Annot/Popup 717 0 R/Page 125>> endobj 720 0 obj<> endobj 721 0 obj< RE Q1: 'required' is a standards word that will cause T10 readers\r> to expect to see exactly how the security method other than NOSEC\r>\ returns an error ... inline ... in the same paragraph as the word\r> 'required'. Sorry, but 'designed' is the best word I can think of\r> to put in the cited text.\rperhaps "is design to" could be changed to "will"?\rif Ralph \(or anyone else\) continues\ to object to making a change, then i can live with "designed". but please fix the tense.\r)/M(D:20080915220711-05'00')/T(Craig_Harmer)/Subj(Highlight)/QuadPoints[463.938 362.614 514.742 362.614 463.938 351.1 514.742 351.1]/RC("design" seems like a poor\ choice of word. i suggested "required", but according to Ralph Weber that's a bad idea: > RE Q1: 'required' is a standards word that will cause T10 readers > to expect to see exactly how the security method other than NOSEC &g\ t; returns an error ... inline ... in the same paragraph as the word > 'required'. Sorry, but 'designed' is the best word I can think of > to put in the cited text. perhaps "is design to" could be changed to "will"?\ 13;if Ralph \(or anyone else\) continues to object to making a change, then i can live with "designed". but please fix the tense.
)/Type/Annot/Popup 720 0 R/Page 125>> endobj 723 0 obj<> endobj 724 0 obj<===Symantec=2=ET=UQOACRND=NPYrxx===&\ #13;"""Unprocessed Comment""" 5.2.4, p 1, s 1
)/Type/Annot/Popup 723 0 R/Page 125>> endobj 726 0 obj<> endobj 727 0 obj<byte 47 s/b byte 51 [to match table \ 60]
)/Type/Annot/Popup 726 0 R/Page 126>> endobj 729 0 obj<> endobj 730 0 obj<===ENDL=16=ET=UACRD=NPYrxx=== &q\ uot;""Unprocessed Comment""" 5.2.6.2, table 62
)/Type/Annot/Popup 729 0 R/Page 126>> endobj 732 0 obj<> endobj 733 0 obj<Byte offset is incorrect. Should sta\ rt at 52.
)/Type/Annot/Popup 732 0 R/Page 126>> endobj 735 0 obj<> endobj 736 0 obj<===Seagate=40=ET=UQOACRND=NPYrxx===&\ #13;"""Unprocessed Comment""" 5.2.6.2, table 62
)/Type/Annot/Popup 735 0 R/Page 126>> endobj 738 0 obj<> endobj 739 0 obj<byte 47 s/b byte 51 [to match table \ 60]
)/Type/Annot/Popup 738 0 R/Page 127>> endobj 741 0 obj<> endobj 742 0 obj<[insert]If the attribute length fiel\ d is set to a value that is less than 18, the unused attribute value bytes shall be placed at the highest offsets in the attribute value field.
)/Type/Annot/Popup 741 0 R/Page 127>> endobj 744 0 obj<> endobj 745 0 obj<table 63 The attribute length fi\ eld s/b 2 bytes not 4 bytes. For compatibility, insert two reserved bytes before the field.
)/Type/Annot/Popup 744 0 R/Page 127>> endobj 747 0 obj<> endobj 748 0 obj<===ENDL=17=ET=UACRD=NPYrxx=== &q\ uot;""Unprocessed Comment""" 5.2.6.2, end of 2nd p on pg
)/Type/Annot/Popup 747 0 R/Page 127>> endobj 750 0 obj<> endobj 751 0 obj<===ENDL=18=ET=UACRD=NPYrxx=== &q\ uot;""Unprocessed Comment""" 5.2.6.3, table 63
)/Type/Annot/Popup 750 0 R/Page 127>> endobj 753 0 obj<> endobj 754 0 obj<===ENDL=19=ET=UACRD=NPYrxx=== &q\ uot;""Unprocessed Comment""" 5.2.6.3, table 63
)/Type/Annot/Popup 753 0 R/Page 127>> endobj 756 0 obj<> endobj 757 0 obj<Byte offset is incorrect. Should sta\ rt at 52.
)/Type/Annot/Popup 756 0 R/Page 127>> endobj 759 0 obj<> endobj 760 0 obj<===Seagate=41=ET=UQOACRND=NPYrxx===&\ #13;"""Unprocessed Comment""" 5.2.6.3, table 63
)/Type/Annot/Popup 759 0 R/Page 127>> endobj 762 0 obj<> endobj 763 0 obj<byte 47 s/b byte 51 [to match table \ 60]
)/Type/Annot/Popup 762 0 R/Page 129>> endobj 765 0 obj<> endobj 766 0 obj<===ENDL=20=ET=UACRD=NPYrxx=== &q\ uot;""Unprocessed Comment""" 5.2.6.4, table 64
)/Type/Annot/Popup 765 0 R/Page 129>> endobj 768 0 obj<> endobj 769 0 obj<Byte offset is incorrect. Should sta\ rt at 52.
)/Type/Annot/Popup 768 0 R/Page 129>> endobj 771 0 obj<> endobj 772 0 obj<===Seagate=42=ET=UQOACRND=NPYrxx===&\ #13;"""Unprocessed Comment""" 5.2.6.4, table 64
)/Type/Annot/Popup 771 0 R/Page 129>> endobj 774 0 obj<> endobj 775 0 obj<bit being set s/b bit being set to o\ ne
)/Type/Annot/Popup 774 0 R/Page 130>> endobj 777 0 obj<> endobj 778 0 obj<===ENDL=21=ET=UACRD=NPYrxx=== &q\ uot;""Unprocessed Comment""" 5.2.7, last p in subclause
)/Type/Annot/Popup 777 0 R/Page 130>> endobj 780 0 obj<> endobj 781 0 obj<In 5.28 and others can't the error report be more specific - NOT supported xxx - or have the form major, minor with even more detail
)/Type/Annot/Popup 780 0 R/Page 131>> endobj 783 0 obj<> endobj 784 0 obj<===IBM=15=ET=UQOACRND=NPYrxx=== \ """Unprocessed Comment""" 5.2.8
)/Type/Annot/Popup 783 0 R/Page 131>> endobj 786 0 obj<> endobj 787 0 obj<0h s/b 00h to match widt\ h of other values in the table
)/Type/Annot/Popup 786 0 R/Page 133>> endobj 789 0 obj<> endobj 790 0 obj<===HP=35=ET=UQOACRND=NPYrxx=== &\ quot;""Unprocessed Comment""" 5.2.13, table 67, 0h row
)/Type/Annot/Popup 789 0 R/Page 133>> endobj 792 0 obj<> endobj 793 0 obj<be updated
)/Type/Annot/Popup 792 0 R/Page 133>> endobj 795 0 obj<> endobj 796 0 obj<===IBM=16=ET=UQOACRND=NPYrxx=== \ """Unprocessed Comment""" 5.2.13, table 67, 0h row
)/Type/Annot/Popup 795 0 R/Page 133>> endobj 798 0 obj<> endobj 799 0 obj<The CDB Continuation Descriptor Leng\ th is a constant \(16\). It currently refers to "n", which is undefined in this table. The paragraph that describes the descriptor length can be specific - it must be 16.
)/Type/Annot/Popup 798 0 R/Page 141>> endobj 801 0 obj<> endobj 802 0 obj<===Seagate=43=ET=UQOACRND=NPYrxx===&\ #13;"""Unprocessed Comment""" 5.4.4, table 77
)/Type/Annot/Popup 801 0 R/Page 141>> endobj 804 0 obj<> endobj 805 0 obj<The CDB Continuation Descriptor Leng\ th is a constant \(20\). It currently refers to "n", which is undefined in this table. The paragraph that describes the descriptor length can be specific - it must be 20.
)/Type/Annot/Popup 804 0 R/Page 142>> endobj 807 0 obj<> endobj 808 0 obj<The CDB Continuation Descriptor Leng\ th is a constant \(20\). It currently refers to "n", which is undefined in this table. The paragraph that describes the descriptor length can be specific - it must be 20.
)/Type/Annot/Popup 807 0 R/Page 142>> endobj 810 0 obj<> endobj 811 0 obj<We suggest the removal of COPY USER \ OBJECTS command from this specification as agreed in the OSD twg. This feature will be revisited for future versions of OSD.
)/Type/Annot/Popup 810 0 R/Page 142>> endobj 813 0 obj<> endobj 814 0 obj<===Seagate=46=ET=UQOACRND=NPYrxx===&\ #13;"""Unprocessed Comment""" 5.4.5
)/Type/Annot/Popup 813 0 R/Page 142>> endobj 816 0 obj<> endobj 817 0 obj<===Seagate=45=ET=UQOACRND=NPYrxx===&\ #13;"""Unprocessed Comment""" 5.4.5, table 78
)/Type/Annot/Popup 816 0 R/Page 142>> endobj 819 0 obj<> endobj 820 0 obj<===Seagate=44=ET=UQOACRND=NPYrxx===&\ #13;"""Unprocessed Comment""" 5.4.5, table 78
)/Type/Annot/Popup 819 0 R/Page 142>> endobj 822 0 obj<> endobj 823 0 obj<that is better but I would add UNSUPPORTED to all field that are illegal due to lack of a feature
)/Type/Annot/Popup 822 0 R/Page 143>> endobj 825 0 obj<> endobj 826 0 obj<===IBM=17=ET=UQOACRND=NPYrxx=== \ """Unprocessed Comment""" 4.5.4, 2nd to last p in subclause
)/Type/Annot/Popup 825 0 R/Page 143>> endobj 828 0 obj<> endobj 829 0 obj<Service action codes values between.\ .. s/b For the operation code 7Fh, service action codes values between... and join with the next sentence to share that "For..." There are some non-7Fh opcodes in the table, and this comment does not apply to their serv\ ice action values.
)/Type/Annot/Popup 828 0 R/Page 145>> endobj 831 0 obj<> endobj 832 0 obj<===HP=36=ET=UQOACRND=NPYrxx=== &\ quot;""Unprocessed Comment""" 6.1, table 80, footnote a
)/Type/Annot/Popup 831 0 R/Page 145>> endobj 834 0 obj<> endobj 835 0 obj<REMOVE COLLECTION should have footno\ te "b".
)/Type/Annot/Popup 834 0 R/Page 146>> endobj 837 0 obj<> endobj 838 0 obj<===Seagate=47=ET=UQOACRND=NPYrxx===&\ #13;"""Unprocessed Comment""" 6.1, table 80, REMOVE COLLECTION row
)/Type/Annot/Popup 837 0 R/Page 146>> endobj 840 0 obj<> endobj 841 0 obj<We suggest the removal of COPY USER \ OBJECTS command from this specification as agreed in the OSD twg. This feature will be revisited for future versions of OSD.
)/Type/Annot/Popup 840 0 R/Page 152>> endobj 843 0 obj<> endobj 844 0 obj<===Seagate=48=ET=QOACRND=NPYrxx===\ 13;"""Remove COPY USER OBJECTS""" 6.4
)/Type/Annot/Popup 843 0 R/Page 152>> endobj 846 0 obj<> endobj 847 0 obj<I would prefer this command removed
)/Type/Annot/Popup 846 0 R/Page 152>> endobj 849 0 obj<> endobj 850 0 obj<===IBM=18=ET=QOACRND=NPYrxx=== &\ quot;""Remove COPY USER OBJECTS""" 6.4
)/Type/Annot/Popup 849 0 R/Page 152>> endobj 852 0 obj<> endobj 853 0 obj<there are a number of questions that\ i raise, below, about the COPY USER OBJECTS command. i think the consensus of the group was that we would simply drop the command from the OSD-2 spec. regardless, i raise the individual issues here ... 4.1\) in section _6.4 COPY USER OBJECTS_ the com\ mand requires that the target object cannot previously exist \(i.e. it's like create and write\). given that the command can copy multiple objects to the target object, and can pick out multiple ranges within each object, this seems like an odd restr\ iction. it's not just a snapshot command, it's more of a general purpose copy command. in it's current form my company doesn't have any particular use for the Copy User Objects command, regardless of whether or not it creates the target object, but if\ we work out the issues with OSD to OSD communication such that a Copy User Objects command can copy from one OSD to another, then i would very much like a Copy User Objects command that worked with pre-existing objects. do we need a Copy User Objects\ command that works with existing objects? \(my inclination would be to change this to requre an existing object, but we could also add another copy command that works with existing objects.\) 4.2\) in section _6.4 COPY USER OBJECTS_, the command allo\ ws the user to specify the "duplication method". while i can imagine how a copy-on-write implementation of copying an entire object would work, i have a more difficult time imagining copy-on-write for a duplicated object that's composed of a bun\ ch of pieces from a bunch of other source objects. assuming a given OSD implementation can support a copy-on-write copy of one object to another, but cannot support copy-on-write for an object composed of pieces of 27 other objects, what should the im\ plementation report for the "Supported object duplication method attributes" attribute on the root attributes page \(Section 7.1.2.8\)? should it report that it only supports byte-by-byte copies for "Copy User Objects", or should i\ t report that it supports many space efficient types, but then fail the "Copy User Objects" command if any kind of range based-copying is requested? one possible solution is to have a "clone user object" that only makes a writable \ clone of an entire existing user object, and another command for "Copy Data", that simply copies data from one or more ranges in one or more user objects to a target object. 4.3\) in section _5.4.5 Copy user object source_, the specification\ of the CPY_ATTR bit \(set to copy user attributes\), says: ... If the CPY_ATTR bit is set to one, all application client settable attributes \(see 7.2.1\) are copied from this source user object to the destination user object. ... in the context \ of COPY USER OBJECTS, this is confusing. "Object Logical Length" is a client settable attribute. how is it treated? presumably, in the case where only part of the original object is copied, or multiple objects copied, we won't change the target \ object logical length to be the same as one of the source objects. it seems to me that Object Logical Length should not be copied even if CPY_ATTR bit is set. if there's a single source object that's copied in it's entirety then it should be the same \ length as the source object anyway. the draft does describe what happens for the "Reserved Data Space" attribute \(it is not copied, it is added to what already exists for the duplicated object\).
)/Type/Annot/Popup 852 0 R/Page 152>> endobj 855 0 obj<> endobj 856 0 obj<===Symantec=4=ET=QOACRND=NPYrxx===\ 13;"""Remove COPY USER OBJECTS""" 6.4
)/Type/Annot/Popup 855 0 R/Page 152>> endobj 858 0 obj<> endobj 859 0 obj<Indicates that attribute list type F\ h should be used. The referenced section says that list type Fh is obsolete. It should be type Eh.
)/Type/Annot/Popup 858 0 R/Page 155>> endobj 861 0 obj<> endobj 862 0 obj<===Seagate=49=ET=UQOACRND=NPYrxx===&\ #13;"""Unprocessed Comment""" 6.5, last p on pg
)/Type/Annot/Popup 861 0 R/Page 155>> endobj 864 0 obj<> endobj 865 0 obj<Wrong reference. Should be 5.2.7, no\ t 5.2.5. Check all other places as well.
)/Type/Annot/Popup 864 0 R/Page 159>> endobj 867 0 obj<> endobj 868 0 obj<===Seagate=50=ET=UQOACRND=NPYrxx===&\ #13;"""Unprocessed Comment""" 6.7.1, last p on pg
)/Type/Annot/Popup 867 0 R/Page 159>> endobj 870 0 obj<> endobj 871 0 obj<the text indicates that The IMMED_TR\ bit is described in 5.2.5, but it is not. it it described in 5.2.7.
)/Type/Annot/Popup 870 0 R/Page 159>> endobj 873 0 obj<> endobj 874 0 obj<===Symantec=8=ET=UQOACRND=NPYrxx===&\ #13;"""Unprocessed Comment""" 6.7.1, last p on pg
)/Type/Annot/Popup 873 0 R/Page 159>> endobj 876 0 obj<> endobj 877 0 obj<CREATE SNAPSHOT s/b CREATE C\ LONE
)/Type/Annot/Popup 876 0 R/Page 160>> endobj 879 0 obj<> endobj 880 0 obj<===Symantec=9=ET=UQOACRND=NPYrxx===&\ #13;"""Unprocessed Comment""" 6.7.1, 1st p after 1st a,b,c list on pg, s 2
)/Type/Annot/Popup 879 0 R/Page 160>> endobj 882 0 obj<> endobj 883 0 obj<be maintained to restarting s/b&\ #13;be maintained so as to facilitate restarting ... the same wording exists in the CREATE SNAPSHOT section
)/Type/Annot/Popup 882 0 R/Page 163>> endobj 885 0 obj<> endobj 886 0 obj<===Symantec=10=ET=UQOACRND=NPYrxx===\ """Unprocessed Comment""" 6.7.3, p 2, s 1
)/Type/Annot/Popup 885 0 R/Page 163>> endobj 888 0 obj<> endobj 889 0 obj<Wrong reference. Should be 5.2.7, no\ t 5.2.5
)/Type/Annot/Popup 888 0 R/Page 168>> endobj 891 0 obj<> endobj 892 0 obj<===Seagate=51=ET=UQOACRND=NPYrxx===&\ #13;"""Unprocessed Comment""" 6.10.1, 2nd p after table 89
)/Type/Annot/Popup 891 0 R/Page 168>> endobj 894 0 obj<> endobj 895 0 obj<like the issues raised in Symantec 1\ 2, the CREATE SNAPSHOT command doesn't seem to have any interlocking with the REFRESH CLONE and RESTORE PARTITION FROM SNAPSHOT. i think it should be an error to create a snapshot of a partition that is currently being modified by one of those other c\ ommand.
)/Type/Annot/Popup 894 0 R/Page 168>> endobj 897 0 obj<> endobj 898 0 obj<===Symantec=13=ET=QOACRND=NPYrxx===&\ #13;"""CREATE SNAPSHOT interlocking w/ other commands""" 6.10
)/Type/Annot/Popup 897 0 R/Page 168>> endobj 900 0 obj<> endobj 901 0 obj<change s/b chain ... check for s\ imilar errors globally
)/Type/Annot/Popup 900 0 R/Page 171>> endobj 903 0 obj<> endobj 904 0 obj<===Symantec=11=ET=UQOACRND=NPYrxx===\ """Unprocessed Comment""" 6.10.2, 1st p after 1st a,b,c list on pg
)/Type/Annot/Popup 903 0 R/Page 171>> endobj 906 0 obj<> endobj 907 0 obj<undefined; s/b undefined; and
)/Type/Annot/Popup 906 0 R/Page 177>> endobj 909 0 obj<> endobj 910 0 obj<===Dell=7=ET=UQOACRND=NPYrxx=== \ """Unprocessed Comment""" 6.12, 2nd to last a,b,c list on pg
)/Type/Annot/Popup 909 0 R/Page 177>> endobj 912 0 obj<> endobj 913 0 obj<the DETACH CLONE, REFRESH SNAPSHOT O\ R CLONE, and RESTORE PARTITION FROM SNAPSHOT command have checks against create completion time and referesh completion time. i assume the reason for these checks is to try and interlock the operations \(so a clone can't be detached while it's being creat\ ed, refreshed, or restored\). unfortunately, the checks don't really accomplish this. for example, the DETACH CLONE command specifies that the command will fail if ... c\) The create completion time attribute is undefined \(see 3.1.51\) and the re\ fresh completion time attribute is undefined this serves to protect partition while it's being created \(because both timestamps are undefined\), but does nothing to interlock with a refresh operation \(since the create completion time attribute remai\ ns unchanged throughout the operation\). for the most part, these checks would accomplish what i assume they're intended to do if we made the following changes: 1\) set Refresh Completion Time and Restore Completion Time attributes to the creation\ time when a partition is created 2\) continue the current behavior of making Refresh Completion Time undefined while the the refresh is in progress 3\) make restore completion time undefined while a restore is in progress 3\) change the check\ s for "refresh completion time is undefined *and* creation completion time attribute is undefined" to or instead, and add checks against the refresh completion time attribute this would also require that primary partitions have a restore com\ pletion time attribute that is set when they are created, which may not be possible. as a suggestion, instead of using the sundry completion times for the purpose of interlocking, it would probably be simpler to simply check if a tracking well known c\ ollection exists in the partition being detached, refreshed, or created and fail the operation if it exists. or we could even leave the mechanism out entirely, and simply specify that if one of the other operations is in progress, the DEATCH CLONE ope\ ration will fail \(no specification of how this is determined\). there is a generic mechanism described in 4.6.6.6 for to insure only one multi-object command is running on a partition \(or is it collection\), but the snapshot and clone commands are n\ ot multi-object commands.
)/Type/Annot/Popup 912 0 R/Page 177>> endobj 915 0 obj<> endobj 916 0 obj<===Symantec=12=ET=QOACRND=NPYrxx===&\ #13;"""Snapshots commands interlocking""" 6.12, first c\) on pg
)/Type/Annot/Popup 915 0 R/Page 177>> endobj 918 0 obj<> endobj 919 0 obj<This only really applies to the get \ attributes parameters. "Set" should be removed.
)/Type/Annot/Popup 918 0 R/Page 193>> endobj 921 0 obj<> endobj 922 0 obj<===Seagate=52=ET=UQOACRND=NPYrxx===&\ #13;"""Unprocessed Comment""" 6.20.1, table 104, 2nd description row
)/Type/Annot/Popup 921 0 R/Page 193>> endobj 924 0 obj<> endobj 925 0 obj<This only really applies to the get \ attributes parameters. "Set" should be removed.
)/Type/Annot/Popup 924 0 R/Page 199>> endobj 927 0 obj<> endobj 928 0 obj<What does Flash have anything to do \ with this command?
)/Type/Annot/Popup 927 0 R/Page 199>> endobj 930 0 obj<> endobj 931 0 obj<===Seagate=53=ET=UQOACRND=NPYrxx===&\ #13;"""Unprocessed Comment""" 6.21, table 113, 2nd description row
)/Type/Annot/Popup 930 0 R/Page 199>> endobj 933 0 obj<> endobj 934 0 obj<===Seagate=54=ET=UQOACRND=NPYrxx===&\ #13;"""Unprocessed Comment""" 6.21, 5th p after table 113
)/Type/Annot/Popup 933 0 R/Page 199>> endobj 936 0 obj<> endobj 937 0 obj<REBUILD IN PROGRESS was int\ ended for SCC \(RAID volumes\) to report that they are rebuilding a RAID volume. OSD performing an object check seems a bit different. I think a new additional sense code is worth adding for this reason. The progress indicator will make more sense if th\ e operation in progress is clearly identified. The time for OBJECT STRUCTURE CHECK to complete is based on the amount of metadata; the time for a RAID rebuild is based on the amount of data. Same comment applies to 6.22.3.
)/Type/Annot/Popup 936 0 R/Page 204>> endobj 939 0 obj<> endobj 940 0 obj<===HP=37=ET=UQOACRND=NPYrxx=== &\ quot;""Unprocessed Comment""" 6.22.2 & 6.22.3
)/Type/Annot/Popup 939 0 R/Page 204>> endobj 942 0 obj<> endobj 943 0 obj<With snapshots, several partitions m\ ight share the same data. It seems like OBJECT STRUCTURE CHECK might need to ensure that all commands to all such partitions are terminated in 6.22.3.
)/Type/Annot/Popup 942 0 R/Page 205>> endobj 945 0 obj<> endobj 946 0 obj<===HP=38=ET=UQOACRND=NPYrxx=== &\ quot;""Unprocessed Comment""" 6.22.3
)/Type/Annot/Popup 945 0 R/Page 205>> endobj 948 0 obj<> endobj 949 0 obj<[field name] TASK TAG s/b COMMAND ID\ ENTIFIER [per SAM-4]
)/Type/Annot/Popup 948 0 R/Page 209>> endobj 951 0 obj<> endobj 952 0 obj<===ENDL=22=ET=UACRD=NPYrxx=== &q\ uot;""Unprocessed Comment""" 6.24, table 120 & text following it
)/Type/Annot/Popup 951 0 R/Page 209>> endobj 954 0 obj<> endobj 955 0 obj<QUERY UNIT ATTENTION s/b QUERY ASYNC\ HRONOUS EVENT
)/Type/Annot/Popup 954 0 R/Page 210>> endobj 957 0 obj<> endobj 958 0 obj<Task Tag Specified s/b Command Ident\ ifier Specified
)/Type/Annot/Popup 957 0 R/Page 210>> endobj 960 0 obj<> endobj 961 0 obj<===ENDL=23=ET=UACRD=NPYrxx=== &q\ uot;""Unprocessed Comment""" 6.24, table 121
)/Type/Annot/Popup 960 0 R/Page 210>> endobj 963 0 obj<> endobj 964 0 obj<===ENDL=24=ET=UACRD=NPYrxx=== &q\ uot;""Unprocessed Comment""" 6.24, table 121
)/Type/Annot/Popup 963 0 R/Page 210>> endobj 966 0 obj<> endobj 967 0 obj<QUERY UNIT ATTENTION s/b QUE\ RY ASYNCHRONOUS EVENT to match final SAM-4 terminology
)/Type/Annot/Popup 966 0 R/Page 210>> endobj 969 0 obj<> endobj 970 0 obj<===HP=39=ET=UQOACRND=NPYrxx=== &\ quot;""Unprocessed Comment""" 6.24, table 121
)/Type/Annot/Popup 969 0 R/Page 210>> endobj 972 0 obj<> endobj 973 0 obj<Wrong reference. Should be 5.2.7, no\ t 5.2.5
)/Type/Annot/Popup 972 0 R/Page 214>> endobj 975 0 obj<> endobj 976 0 obj<===Seagate=55=ET=UQOACRND=NPYrxx===&\ #13;"""Unprocessed Comment""" 6.26.1, 2nd p after table 125, s 1
)/Type/Annot/Popup 975 0 R/Page 214>> endobj 978 0 obj<> endobj 979 0 obj<0000h. s/b 0000h;
)/Type/Annot/Popup 978 0 R/Page 215>> endobj 981 0 obj<> endobj 982 0 obj<===Dell=8=ET=UQOACRND=NPYrxx=== \ """Unprocessed Comment""" 6.26.1, 1st a,b,c list on pg
)/Type/Annot/Popup 981 0 R/Page 215>> endobj 984 0 obj<> endobj 985 0 obj<It should be stated explicitly that an area of an object cleared with a clear command or having as content the default value of 0 in all bytes may be reported as a data hole!
)/Type/Annot/Popup 984 0 R/Page 220>> endobj 987 0 obj<> endobj 988 0 obj<===IBM=19=ET=QOACRND=NPYrxx=== &\ quot;""CLEAR interactions w/ READ MAP""" 6.28.1
)/Type/Annot/Popup 987 0 R/Page 220>> endobj 990 0 obj<> endobj 991 0 obj<Unmarked set by ENDL Texas
)/StateModel(Marked)/Type/Annot/Popup 990 0 R/Page 220>> endobj 993 0 obj<> endobj 994 0 obj<REFERESH s/b REFRESH<\ /p>)/Type/Annot/Popup 993 0 R/Page 227>> endobj 996 0 obj<> endobj 997 0 obj<
===HP=40=ET=UQOACRND=NPYrxx=== &\ quot;""Unprocessed Comment""" 6.30.1, table 136 title
)/Type/Annot/Popup 996 0 R/Page 227>> endobj 999 0 obj<> endobj 1000 0 obj<in 6.30 "REFRESH SNAPSHOT OR CL\ ONE" and 6.35 "RESTORE PARTITION FROM SNAPSHOT", the duplication method can be defined, which means that it can be different than the duplication method used originally to create the partition. for refresh, we should require that the sa\ me duplication method be used to refresh the partition as was used to create. for restore, we should require that the same duplication method used to create the snapshot be used to restore the source partition. \(if someone believes that the REFRESH S\ NAPSHOT OR CLONE should also support changing the duplication method, then i might withdraw this objection. however, i think it would be better to have a separate command for that purpose since this one will both change the duplication method and, potenti\ ally, change the contents\).
)/Type/Annot/Popup 999 0 R/Page 227>> endobj 1002 0 obj<> endobj 1003 0 obj<===Symantec=16=ET=QOACRND=NPYrxx===&\ #13;"""REFRESH/RESTORE Duplication Methods""" 6.30
)/Type/Annot/Popup 1002 0 R/Page 227>> endobj 1005 0 obj<> endobj 1006 0 obj<Wrong reference. Should be 5.2.7, no\ t 5.2.5
)/Type/Annot/Popup 1005 0 R/Page 228>> endobj 1008 0 obj<> endobj 1009 0 obj<===Seagate=56=ET=UQOACRND=NPYrxx===&\ #13;"""Unprocessed Comment""" 6.30.1, 1st p on pg
)/Type/Annot/Popup 1008 0 R/Page 228>> endobj 1011 0 obj<> endobj 1012 0 obj<in 6.30 "REFRESH SNAPSHOT OR CL\ ONE", the mechansim whereby an incomplete command can be completed by the REFRESH SNAPSHOT OR CLONE command seems to have a flaw or two. While the snapshot/clone tracking well known collection is, roughly speaking, supposed to contain the set of \ objects that still need processing, the highlighted text doesn't make sense if we're completing an operation that was already in progress. in particular, adding all of the objects back to the collection seems to preclude processing only the objects that w\ eren't completed.
)/Type/Annot/Popup 1011 0 R/Page 230>> endobj 1014 0 obj<> endobj 1015 0 obj<===Symantec=17=ET=QOACRND=NPYrxx===&\ #13;"""Snapshot commands restart flaws""" 6.30.2, last p in subclause
)/Type/Annot/Popup 1014 0 R/Page 230>> endobj 1017 0 obj<> endobj 1018 0 obj<Not clear on what this paragraph is \ trying to address. The command tracking attributes page is removed by this command, which certainly qualifies as modifying them.
)/Type/Annot/Popup 1017 0 R/Page 235>> endobj 1020 0 obj<> endobj 1021 0 obj<===Seagate=57=ET=UQOACRND=NPYrxx===&\ #13;"""Unprocessed Comment""" 6.32, 5th from last p on pg
)/Type/Annot/Popup 1020 0 R/Page 235>> endobj 1023 0 obj<> endobj 1024 0 obj<Wrong reference. Should be 5.2.7, no\ t 5.2.5
)/Type/Annot/Popup 1023 0 R/Page 236>> endobj 1026 0 obj<> endobj 1027 0 obj<===Seagate=58=ET=UQOACRND=NPYrxx===&\ #13;"""Unprocessed Comment""" 6.33, 3rd p after table 141
)/Type/Annot/Popup 1026 0 R/Page 236>> endobj 1029 0 obj<> endobj 1030 0 obj<there may be a race condition simila\ r to the one described in Symantec 12 with REMOVE PARTITION and RESTORE PARTITION FROM SNAPSHOT. what happens \(i.e. what error is returned\) if a REMOVE PARTITION is executed on a partition while RESTORE PARTITION FROM SNAPSHOT is running with the same p\ artition as the target?
)/Type/Annot/Popup 1029 0 R/Page 237>> endobj 1032 0 obj<> endobj 1033 0 obj<===Symantec=14=ET=QOACRND=NPYrxx===&\ #13;"""REMOVE PARTITION race condition""" 6.34
)/Type/Annot/Popup 1032 0 R/Page 237>> endobj 1035 0 obj<> endobj 1036 0 obj<Wrong reference. Should be 5.2.7, no\ t 5.2.5
)/Type/Annot/Popup 1035 0 R/Page 239>> endobj 1038 0 obj<> endobj 1039 0 obj<===Seagate=59=ET=UQOACRND=NPYrxx===&\ #13;"""Unprocessed Comment""" 6.35.1, last p on pg
)/Type/Annot/Popup 1038 0 R/Page 239>> endobj 1041 0 obj<> endobj 1042 0 obj<partition\( add space
)/Type/Annot/Popup 1041 0 R/Page 239>> endobj 1044 0 obj<> endobj 1045 0 obj<===HP=41=ET=UQOACRND=NPYrxx=== &\ quot;""Unprocessed Comment""" 6.35.1, p 1
)/Type/Annot/Popup 1044 0 R/Page 239>> endobj 1047 0 obj<> endobj 1048 0 obj<in 6.35 "RESTORE PARTITION FROM\ SNAPSHOT", i don't see a mechanism to prevent a partition from being restored from two different snapshots at the same time. we should create such a mechanism, or at least define the error to be returned if this is attempted.
)/Type/Annot/Popup 1047 0 R/Page 239>> endobj 1050 0 obj<> endobj 1051 0 obj<in 6.35 "RESTORE PARTITION FROM\ SNAPSHOT" and 6.30 REFRESH SNAPSHOT OR CLONE, i don't see any clauses which require objects be removed from the target partition. i would assume that after the command runs, the target partition is an exact duplicate of the original partition, which\ should include removing any objects that were created after the snapshot was created.
)/Type/Annot/Popup 1050 0 R/Page 239>> endobj 1053 0 obj<> endobj 1054 0 obj<===Symantec=18=ET=QOACRND=NPYrxx===&\ #13;"""Overlapping RESTOREs""" 6.35
)/Type/Annot/Popup 1053 0 R/Page 239>> endobj 1056 0 obj<> endobj 1057 0 obj<===Symantec=19=ET=QOACRND=NPYrxx===&\ #13;"""REFRESH/RESTORE and deleted object removal""" 6.35 & 6.30
)/Type/Annot/Popup 1056 0 R/Page 239>> endobj 1059 0 obj<> endobj 1060 0 obj<processing complete s/b proc\ essing is complete
)/Type/Annot/Popup 1059 0 R/Page 241>> endobj 1062 0 obj<> endobj 1063 0 obj<===Symantec=20=ET=UQOACRND=NPYrxx===\ """Unprocessed Comment""" 6.35.4, last p on pg
)/Type/Annot/Popup 1062 0 R/Page 241>> endobj 1065 0 obj<> endobj 1066 0 obj<device sever s/b device serv\ er
)/Type/Annot/Popup 1065 0 R/Page 248>> endobj 1068 0 obj<> endobj 1069 0 obj<===HP=42=ET=UQOACRND=NPYrxx=== &\ quot;""Unprocessed Comment""" 6.38.2, 1st p on pg
)/Type/Annot/Popup 1068 0 R/Page 248>> endobj 1071 0 obj<> endobj 1072 0 obj<represents; needs and/or?
)/Type/Annot/Popup 1071 0 R/Page 259>> endobj 1074 0 obj<> endobj 1075 0 obj<===Dell=9=ET=UQOACRND=NPYrxx=== \ """Unprocessed Comment""" 7.1.3.4, 1st a,b,c list in subclause
)/Type/Annot/Popup 1074 0 R/Page 259>> endobj 1077 0 obj<> endobj 1078 0 obj<represents; needs and/or?
)/Type/Annot/Popup 1077 0 R/Page 260>> endobj 1080 0 obj<> endobj 1081 0 obj<===Dell=10=ET=UQOACRND=NPYrxx=== \ ;"""Unprocessed Comment""" 7.1.3.5, 1st a,b,c list in subclause
)/Type/Annot/Popup 1080 0 R/Page 260>> endobj 1083 0 obj<> endobj 1084 0 obj<Missing the following entry: "P\ +7h"
)/Type/Annot/Popup 1083 0 R/Page 260>> endobj 1086 0 obj<> endobj 1087 0 obj<===Seagate=60=ET=UQOACRND=NPYrxx===&\ #13;"""Unprocessed Comment""" 7.1.3.5, table 157
)/Type/Annot/Popup 1086 0 R/Page 260>> endobj 1089 0 obj<> endobj 1090 0 obj<represents; needs and/or?
)/Type/Annot/Popup 1089 0 R/Page 261>> endobj 1092 0 obj<> endobj 1093 0 obj<===Dell=11=ET=UQOACRND=NPYrxx=== \ ;"""Unprocessed Comment""" 7.1.3.6, 1st a,b,c list in subclause
)/Type/Annot/Popup 1092 0 R/Page 261>> endobj 1095 0 obj<> endobj 1096 0 obj<represents; needs and/or?
)/Type/Annot/Popup 1095 0 R/Page 262>> endobj 1098 0 obj<> endobj 1099 0 obj<===Dell=12=ET=UQOACRND=NPYrxx=== \ ;"""Unprocessed Comment""" 7.1.3.7, 1st a,b,c list in subclause
)/Type/Annot/Popup 1098 0 R/Page 262>> endobj 1101 0 obj<> endobj 1102 0 obj<The field that the Maximum CDB conti\ nuation length field establishes the upper limit for is a 4-byte field. Should the length of this attribute be 4 bytes to match?
)/Type/Annot/Popup 1101 0 R/Page 263>> endobj 1104 0 obj<> endobj 1105 0 obj<===HP=43=ET=UQOACRND=NPYrxx=== &\ quot;""Unprocessed Comment""" 7.1.3.8, table 160, Maximum CDB continuation length row
)/Type/Annot/Popup 1104 0 R/Page 263>> endobj 1107 0 obj<> endobj 1108 0 obj<Default isolation method attribute s\ hould be 110h, not 111h.
)/Type/Annot/Popup 1107 0 R/Page 266>> endobj 1110 0 obj<> endobj 1111 0 obj<Supported isolation methods attribut\ e should be 111h, not 112h.
)/Type/Annot/Popup 1110 0 R/Page 266>> endobj 1113 0 obj<> endobj 1114 0 obj<===Seagate=61=ET=UQOACRND=NPYrxx===&\ #13;"""Unprocessed Comment""" 7.1.3.8, 1st p on pg
)/Type/Annot/Popup 1113 0 R/Page 266>> endobj 1116 0 obj<> endobj 1117 0 obj<===Seagate=62=ET=UQOACRND=NPYrxx===&\ #13;"""Unprocessed Comment""" 7.1.3.8, 2nd p after table 162
)/Type/Annot/Popup 1116 0 R/Page 266>> endobj 1119 0 obj<> endobj 1120 0 obj<[see highlighted text]...however, th\ ere is a separate attribute, 311h Support for snapshot refreshing that is supposed to control whether or not snapshots can be refreshed \(see text above Table 167\): "If it is defined \(see 3.1.14\), the support for snapshot refreshing attribute \ \(number 311h\) \(see table 167\) shall indicate how the REFRESH SNAPSHOT command \(see 6.30\) is supported. If the support for snapshot refreshing attribute is undefined \(see 3.1.51\), then the REFRESH SNAPSHOT command is not supported." there \ are two obvious ways to fix this. because i think a profliferation of optional features is a bad idea, i'd suggest that we change the above text to require that the attribute be defined. however, if we feel that this feature needs to be optional \(sep\ arate from CREATE SNAPSHOT\), then RESTORE PARTITION FROM SNAPSHOT should also be optional even when CREATE SNAPSHOT is defined. but we should lump REFRESH SNAPSHOT and RESTORE PARTITION FROM SNAPSHOT together \(i.e. support both or neither\).
<\ /body>)/Type/Annot/Popup 1119 0 R/Page 267>> endobj 1122 0 obj<> endobj 1123 0 obj<===Symantec=21=ET=QOACRND=NPYrxx===&\ #13;"""Too many attributes controlling REFRESH""" 7.1.3.8, 4th p on pg
)/Type/Annot/Popup 1122 0 R/Page 267>> endobj 1125 0 obj<> endobj 1126 0 obj<missing "C0h reserved".
)/Type/Annot/Popup 1125 0 R/Page 271>> endobj 1128 0 obj<> endobj 1129 0 obj<Should be 2FFh, not 1FFh.
\ )/Type/Annot/Popup 1128 0 R/Page 271>> endobj 1131 0 obj<> endobj 1132 0 obj<===Seagate=63=ET=UQOACRND=NPYrxx===&\ #13;"""Unprocessed Comment""" 7.1.3.9, table 169, 10th row
)/Type/Annot/Popup 1131 0 R/Page 271>> endobj 1134 0 obj<> endobj 1135 0 obj<===Seagate=64=ET=UQOACRND=NPYrxx===&\ #13;"""Unprocessed Comment""" 7.1.3.9, table 169, 19th row
)/Type/Annot/Popup 1134 0 R/Page 271>> endobj 1137 0 obj<> endobj 1138 0 obj<i think there's an "is" mi\ ssing between "partition" and "the". probably "object duplications", in the same phrase, should be singular rather than plural.
)/Type/Annot/Popup 1137 0 R/Page 272>> endobj 1140 0 obj<> endobj 1141 0 obj<===Symantec=3=ET=UQOACRND=NPYrxx===&\ #13;"""Unprocessed Comment""" 7.1.3.9, 1st p after first a,b,c list on pg
)/Type/Annot/Popup 1140 0 R/Page 272>> endobj 1143 0 obj<> endobj 1144 0 obj<Grammar: missing "is" betw\ een "object" and "the"
)/Type/Annot/Popup 1143 0 R/Page 277>> endobj 1146 0 obj<> endobj 1147 0 obj<===Seagate=65=ET=UQOACRND=NPYrxx===&\ #13;"""Unprocessed Comment""" 7.1.3.11, 1st full p on pg
)/Type/Annot/Popup 1146 0 R/Page 277>> endobj 1149 0 obj<> endobj 1150 0 obj<duplication method does not appear a\ s an attribute in the Snapshots Information attributes page. i think it should. adding this is also required in some later comments.
)/Type/Annot/Popup 1149 0 R/Page 319>> endobj 1152 0 obj<> endobj 1153 0 obj<===Symantec=15=ET=QOACRND=NPYrxx===&\ #13;"""Duplication Method s/b Snapshot attribute""" 7.1.3.30
)/Type/Annot/Popup 1152 0 R/Page 319>> endobj 1155 0 obj<> endobj 1156 0 obj<, s/b ;
)/Type/Annot/Popup 1155 0 R/Page 320>> endobj 1158 0 obj<> endobj 1159 0 obj<===Dell=13=ET=UQOACRND=NPYrxx=== \ ;"""Unprocessed Comment""" 7.1.3.30, 2nd a,b,c list after table 222
)/Type/Annot/Popup 1158 0 R/Page 320>> endobj 1161 0 obj<> endobj 1162 0 obj<On behalf of Panasas: For purpos\ es of capacity accounting, it is helpful to know how much space a given command has consumed. can we add \(if we don't already have\) a specific attribute on the "current command" page or some such thing which returns "capacity delta&quo\ t; for the given command [type = int64]? i realize this is a little late in the game, but this was pointed out to me pretty recently at panasas, and should be pretty simple and non-intrusive. i believe there are some commands which already retur\ n this as part of the standard response code, so having a common dropping area for this would be cleaner as well.
)/Type/Annot/Popup 1161 0 R/Page 322>> endobj 1164 0 obj<> endobj 1165 0 obj<===Seagate=66=ET=QOACRND=NPYrxx===\ 13;"""Current Command space consumption attribute""" 7.1.3.31
)/Type/Annot/Popup 1164 0 R/Page 322>> endobj 1167 0 obj<> endobj 1168 0 obj<table 229 The attribute value fi\ eld is not 8-byte aligned. Six bytes must be added before the field begins. Suggest adding these bytes before the attribute length field.
)/Type/Annot/Popup 1167 0 R/Page 327>> endobj 1170 0 obj<> endobj 1171 0 obj<===ENDL=25=ET=UQOACRND=NPYrxx=== \ ;"""Unprocessed Comment""" 7.1.4.3, table 229
)/Type/Annot/Popup 1170 0 R/Page 327>> endobj 1173 0 obj<> endobj 1174 0 obj<F1 s/b F1h
\ )/Type/Annot/Popup 1173 0 R/Page 331>> endobj 1176 0 obj<> endobj 1177 0 obj<===HP=44=ET=UQOACRND=NPYrxx=== &\ quot;""Unprocessed Comment""" 7.5.2.1, table 234, last row
)/Type/Annot/Popup 1176 0 R/Page 331>> endobj 1179 0 obj<> endobj 1180 0 obj<Consider adding a footnote explainin\ g how all the OSD-1 opcodes were made obsolete and replaced in OSD-2. Item d\) on page 2 already explains that, but this table listing opcodes would be a good place to highlight it.
)/Type/Annot/Popup 1179 0 R/Page 334>> endobj 1182 0 obj<> endobj 1183 0 obj<Add "\(part n of 2\)" to t\ able B.1 header
)/Type/Annot/Popup 1182 0 R/Page 334>> endobj 1185 0 obj<> endobj 1186 0 obj<===HP=46=ET=UQOACRND=NPYrxx=== &\ quot;""Unprocessed Comment""" B.1, table B.1 title
)/Type/Annot/Popup 1185 0 R/Page 334>> endobj 1188 0 obj<> endobj 1189 0 obj<===HP=45=ET=UQOACRND=NPYrxx=== &\ quot;""Unprocessed Comment""" B.1, table B.1, footnotes
)/Type/Annot/Popup 1188 0 R/Page 334>> endobj trailer <> %%EOF