T10/08-382r1 Voting Results on T10 Letter Ballot 08-381r0 on Forwarding FCP-4 to First Public Review Ballot closed: 2008/10/16 12:00 noon MDT Organization Name S Vote Add'l Info --------------------------------- -------------------- - ---- ---------- AMCC Paul von Stamwitz P Yes Brocade David Peterson P Yes Cmnts Dell, Inc. Kevin Marks P Yes EMC Corp. David Black A Yes Cmnts Emulex Robert H. Nixon A Yes ENDL Ralph O. Weber P Yes Cmnts FCI Douglas Wagner P Abs Cmnts Finisar Corp. David Freeman P Yes Foxconn Electronics Elwood Parsons P Abs Cmnts Fujitsu Mike Fitzpatrick P Yes Hewlett Packard Co. Rob Elliott P No Cmnts Hitachi Global Storage Tech. Dan Colegrove P Yes IBM Corp. Kevin Butt P No Cmnts Intel Corp. Mark Seidel P Abs Cmnts Kawasaki Microelectronics Am Joel Silverman P Yes KnowledgeTek, Inc. Dennis Moore P Yes Lexar Media, Inc. John Geldman P Abs Cmnts LSI Corp. John Lohmeyer P No Cmnts Marvell Semiconductor, Inc. Paul Wassenberg A Yes Maxim Integrated Products Gregory Tabor P Abs Cmnts Microsoft Corp. Robert Griswold P Yes Molex Inc. Jay Neer P Yes NetApp Frederick Knight P No Cmnts Nvidia Corp. Mark Overby P Abs Cmnts PMC-Sierra Tim Symons P Yes Quantum Corp. Paul Suhler P Yes Samsung Joseph Chen P Yes SanDisk Corporation Avraham Shimor P Yes Seagate Technology Gerald Houlder P Yes Sun Microsystems, Inc. Dale LaFollette P Yes Symantec Roger Cummings P Yes TycoElectronics Scott Shuey A Yes Western Digital Mark Evans P Abs Cmnts Ballot totals: (22:4:7:0=33) 22 Yes 4 No 7 Abstain 0 Organization(s) did not vote 33 Total voting organizations 14 Ballot(s) included comments This 2/3rds majority ballot passed. 22 Yes are more than half the membership eligible to vote [greater than 16] AND 22 Yes are at least 18 (2/3rds of those voting YES or NO [26]). Key: P Voter is principal member A Voter is alternate member Abs Abstain vote DNV Organization did not vote Cmnts Comments were included with ballot NoCmnts No comments were included with a vote that requires comments [This report prepared by LB2 v2.5.] ************************************************************** Comments attached to Yes ballot from David Peterson of Brocade: Problem: REC response reason code and reason code explantion usage. Solution: Clarify that an FCP_Port should behave the same if it receives either reason code 03h or 09h in response to an REC ELS if the reason code explanation is either 15h or 17h. ************************************************************** Comments attached to Yes ballot from David Black of EMC Corp.: [First line of each comment is #, Technical/Editorial, Page #, Section/Table/Figure #] 1 T 1 Section 2.3 FC-LS reference should not be listed as under development. Does FC-LS-2 need to be referenced? 2 E 2 Section 3.1.1 Remove Class 4 from list of examples for acknowledged class. Also "class" --> "Fibre Channel class" for clarity. 3 E 2 Section 3.1.5 "that is returned" --> "that is automatically returned to the application client" in order to better match "autosense" and the definition of "sense data". 4 E 2 Section 3.1.8 Change "extent" to "amount" or "size" to avoid confusion. 5 E 4 Section 3.1.43, 3.1.44 "A loop operating" --> "A Fibre Channel arbitrated loop operating" for clarity. 6 T 4 Section 3.1.45 The word "arbitrary" seems wrong. The key concept is that the data is not accessed in sequential order. Also, change "extent" to "size". 7 T 4 Section 3.1.46 "I3" is easily confused with "13" in the font used. Clarify in some fashion. 8 T 5 Section 3.1.61 Linked commands are obsolete. Remove them from this definition. 9 E 5 Section 3.1.64 "Any class" -> "Any Fibre Channel class" for clarity. 10 T 7 Section 3.3.3 Expand definition of "ignored" so that the entity is ignored by whatever receives it, not just a "SCSI device". 11 T 7 Section 3.3.10 In definition of "restricted, change "other SCSI standards" --> "other standards" for generality. 12 T 10 Table 1 "Send Task Management Request" is missing. Section 4.2 refers to this operation. With two exceptions, an unsolicited command IU is used. 13 T 10 Section 4.2 Remove "or a list of linked requests" from first paragraph. Linked commands are obsolete. 14 T 10 Section 4.2 Second paragraph covers sending a command. Text needs to be added to cover task management functions, including mentioning the use of link services (ABTS, REC) to realize two of the task management functions in place of sending a command IU. 15 T 11 Section 4.2 Remove last paragraph on p.11, it described linked command handling. Linked commands are obsolete. 16 T 12 Section 4.2 "designed to operate with any class of service" -> "designed to operate with any unicast Fibre Channel class of service". FCP is not going to work well over over FC multicast ;-). 17 E 12 Section 4.2 "SCSI allows the SCSI initiator port function in any FCP_Port and the SCSI target port function in any FCP_Port." --> "The SCSI initiator port function may exist in any FCP_Port and the SCSI target port function may exist in any FCP_Port." 18 T 12 Section 4.3 In "A device server that supports bidirectional commands may implement both unidirectional and bidirectional commands." change "may" --> "should" as a device that implements only bidirectional commands will be all but useless. 19 E 12 Section 4.4 "were" -> "where" in first line of section. 20 E 12 Section 4.4 "is often not critical" -> "may not be critical" in second line of section. "are not important" -> "may not be important" in third line line of section. 21 T 13 Section 4.4 Item g) can cause imprecise execution of a task managment function that affects mutiple tasks, e.g., ABORT TASK SET. Allow the CRN for a task management function to be non-zero, but do not require it to be non-zero. 22 E 13 Section 4.4 "that used for" --> "that are used for" in last paragraph of section. 23 E 13 Section 4.5 "bit" -> "bits" in the next to last line of first paragraph of section. "is used to negotiate" -> "are used to negotiate" in last line of first paragraph of section. 24 T 14 Section 4.5 Why is confirmed completion forbidden for task management requests? 25 T 14 Section 4.5 Remove paragraph and a)-b) list on command linking. Linked commands are obsolete. 26 E 17 Section 4.9.1 "Exchnage" -> "Exchange" in b) item below Table 3. 27 T 20 Table 7 Qualify "Hard Address Acquisition Attempted" clearing cffect as applying to arbitrated loop only. Elaboration of footnote 1 is one possible means of doing this. 28 T 21 Table 8 Qualify "Hard Address Acquisition Attempted" clearing effect as applying to arbitrated loop only. A table foonote may be appropriate. 29 E 21 Section 4.11 "for the following" -> "as a consequence of the following events" 30 E 25 Section 6.2 5th paragraph: "An image pair may also be established by an implicit Process Login established by methods outside the scope of this standard." Is an "or" missing between "implicit Process Login" and "established by methods"? If not, suggest changing: "established" --> "performed". 31 E 27 Section 6.3.3 "information is complete enough so that login (i.e., PLOGI ELS) is sufficient to perform" --> "information is sufficient for login (i.e., PLOGI ELS) to perform" 32 E 27 Table 10 Three bits (the two validity bits for process associators plus READ FCP_XFER_RDY DISABLED) have required values, but only the required value for READ FCP_XFER_RDY DISABLED is indicated in the table. Either indicate all 3 required values or none of them. Adding the requirement that the two process associator valid bits be zero is the preferred resolution. 33 T 28 Section 6.3.4 Should the two process associator fields (words 1 and 2) be required to be zero or be RESERVED? They aren't used. 34 T 32 Section 6.4 Add text indicating non-use of the PRLO parameter that has been added for FC-SB-4. 35 T 34 Section 7.2 and 7.3 Add new FC-4 TYPE and features. In Table 12, define FC-4 feature bit 3 for TYPE 8 as indicating registration of extended FC-4 features for FCP. 36 T 39 Table 19 Linked commands are obsolete, so IUs T3 and T4 are also obsolete. 37 T 40 Table 20 Linked commands are obsolete, so remove "Linked or" from the SCSI primitive cell in the I5 row. 38 E 41 Section 9.2.2.1 Both of these are in the last paragraph on p.41: "task managmenent function" -> "task management function" "the rules for selection of incorrect logical units" -> "the rules for responding to selection of an incorrect logical unit" 39 T 42 Section 9.2.2.2 Why no support for precise delivery of task management functions? Comment EMC-21 is related. For what it's worth, iSCSI not only supports, but requires precise delivery of task management functions. 40 T 42 Table 22 The SIMPLE task attribute has two description fields. Only one of them can be correct - figure out which one it is and delete the other one. 41 T 43-44 Section 9.2.2.5 For ABORT TASK SET, CLEAR TASK SET, and LOGICAL UNIT RESET, the "may" requirement for clearing exchange resources is too weak. This needs to be at least a "should" requirement, possibly with language about when it is necessary vs. not necessary to clear exchange resources. 42 E 44 Section 9.2.2.5 Last paragraph in section: "by transmitting ab ABTS-LS" --> "by transmitting an ABTS-LS" 43 T 50 Section 9.5.1 Linked commands are obsolete. Remove first paragraph on p.50. 44 E 75 Section 12.4.2.2 "with the PARAMETER field bot 0 set to one" -> "with the PARAMETER field bit 0 set to one" 45 T 86 Annex B.1.11 Linked commands are obsolete. Remove this example. 46 T 126 Annex D.1.1 and D.1.2 The use of "authenticating" in the first sentence of both of these annexes is incorrect with respect to FC-SP. Two possible alternative words are "verifying" and "validating". 47 T 127 Annex D.2 and D.3 The use of "authentication" in the titles of both of these annexes is incorrect with respect to FC-SP. Two possible alternative words are "verification" and "validation". ************************************************************** Comments attached to Yes ballot from Ralph O. Weber of ENDL: ENDL Texas 1 PDF pg 44, pg 28, 6.3.4, word 3, bit 11, s 2 <> It is not necessary to mention initiator FCP_Port twice in the same sentence. _S_If the ENHANCED DISCOVERY bit is set to one, the Originator is requesting that an image pair be established only if the initiator FCP_Port has been authorized to access one or more logical units, not including default logical units, that are addressed through the target FCP_Port. ENDL Texas 2 PDF pg 44, pg 28, 6.3.4, word 3, bit 10, s 1 <> is hard to read and thus unclear _S_When the REC ELS supported (REC_SUPPORT) bit is set to one, the Originator is indicating that it supports the transmission of the REC ELS when it is acting as an initiator FCP_Port. ENDL Texas 3 PDF pg 44, pg 28, 6.3.4, word 3, bit 8, s 1 <> is hard to read and thus unclear _S_When the RETRY bit is set to one, the Originator or Responder is indicating that its initiator FCP_Port functions support the capability of requesting a retransmission of unsuccessfully transmitted data or that its target FCP_Port functions support the capability of performing a requested retransmission. ENDL Texas 4 PDF pg 48, pg 32, 6.3.5, word 3, bit 11, s 1 <> It is not necessary to mention initiator FCP_Port twice in the same sentence. _S_When the ENHANCED DISCOVERY bit is set to one, the Responder is indicating that it supports enhanced discovery (i.e., an image pair is established only if the initiator FCP_Port is authorized to access logical units, other than default logical units, that are addressed through the target FCP_Port). ENDL Texas 5 PDF pg 48, pg 32, 6.3.5, word 3, bit 11, s 2 <> is unnecessarily complicated, particularly in context _S_When the ENHANCED DISCOVERY bit is set to zero, the Responder is indicating that it does not support enhanced discovery when it is acting as a target FCP_Port. ENDL Texas 6 PDF pg 48, pg 32, 6.3.5, word 3, bit 10, s 1 <> is hard to read and thus unclear _S_When the REC ELS supported (REC_SUPPORT) bit is set to one, the Responder is indicating that it supports the receipt of the REC ELS, when it is acting as a target FCP_Port. ************************************************************** Comments attached to Abs ballot from Douglas Wagner of FCI: no knowlege in this area. ************************************************************** Comments attached to Abs ballot from Elwood Parsons of Foxconn Electronics: Lack of expertise ************************************************************** Comments attached to No ballot from Rob Elliott of Hewlett Packard Co.: comment number 1 Page=2 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= initiator and target s/b initiator port and target port --- comment number 2 Page=2 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= task s/b command --- comment number 3 Page=2 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= WEb s/b Web --- comment number 4 Page=2 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= 570415 s/b 5704 --- comment number 5 Page=9 Subtype=Text Subj=Note Author=RElliott Comment= The table of contents should show the annex titles For example: Annex A should be: A SAM-4 mapping to FCP-4 --- comment number 6 Page=14 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= sequence s/b Sequence --- comment number 7 Page=14 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= Lower-Level Interfaces s/b SCSI Storage Interfaces --- comment number 8 Page=14 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= Device Level Interfaces s/b Fibre Channel Interfaces --- comment number 9 Page=14 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= Fibre Channel Classes of Service 1, 2, and 3 is out of date. Class 2 is obsolete, and there are some other classes now. --- comment number 10 Page=15 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= Information Units used to transfer SCSI commands, data, and status across a Fibre Channel connection s/b FC-FS-3 frame header --- comment number 11 Page=15 Subtype=StrikeOut Subj=Cross-Out Author=RElliott Comment=FC-GS-6 --- comment number 12 Page=15 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= Information Unit s/b FCP Information Unit --- comment number 13 Page=15 Subtype=StrikeOut Subj=Cross-Out Author=RElliott Comment=the SCSI management features for Fibre Channel, including --- comment number 14 Page=15 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= the protocol for transmitting SCSI information over Fibre Channel. s/b FCP --- comment number 15 Page=15 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= error recovery algorithms s/b operation and recovery --- comment number 16 Page=15 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= error recovery algorithms s/b link error detection and error recovery procedures --- comment number 17 Page=15 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= the protocol for transmitting SCSI information over Fibre Channel s/b FCP --- comment number 18 Page=15 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= protocol s/b FCP protocol --- comment number 19 Page=15 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= the protocol for transmitting SCSI information over Fibre Channel s/b FCP --- comment number 20 Page=15 Subtype=StrikeOut Subj=Cross-Out Author=RElliott Comment=-4 --- comment number 21 Page=15 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= the protocol for transmitting SCSI information over Fibre Channel s/b FCP --- comment number 22 Page=15 Subtype=StrikeOut Subj=Cross-Out Author=RElliott Comment=-4 --- comment number 23 Page=15 Subtype=StrikeOut Subj=Cross-Out Author=RElliott Comment=-4 --- comment number 24 Page=15 Subtype=StrikeOut Subj=Cross-Out Author=RElliott Comment= The Fibre Channel Protocol for SCSI, Fourth Version (FCP-4) standard has the following annexes: --- comment number 25 Page=15 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= SCSI device capabilities over Fibre Channel s/b FCP device capabilities --- comment number 26 Page=16 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= INCITS Project 1683-D SAM-4 should have an ANSI INCITS-xxx number now --- comment number 27 Page=17 Subtype=StrikeOut Subj=Cross-Out Author=RElliott Comment=r --- comment number 28 Page=17 Subtype=StrikeOut Subj=Cross-Out Author=RElliott Comment= and describes additional error recovery capabilities for the Fibre Channel Protocol. That was new in FCP-3, but is no longer new in FCP-4. --- comment number 29 Page=17 Subtype=StrikeOut Subj=Cross-Out Author=RElliott Comment= Delete: INCITS TR-36-2004, Fibre Channel - Device Attach (FC-DA) and upgrade all references to FC-DA to FC-DA-2. Don't refer to two versions of a standard simultaneously. --- comment number 30 Page=17 Subtype=StrikeOut Subj=Cross-Out Author=RElliott Comment= Delete: ANSI/INCITS 402-2005, SCSI Architecture Model - 3 (SAM-3) and upgrade all references to SAM-4. Don't refer to two versions of a standard simultaneously. --- comment number 31 Page=17 Subtype=Text Subj=Note Author=RElliott Comment= Page 1 has 1" margins on both left and right. Even pages 2+ have 0.8" margins on the left and 1" margins on the right. Odd pages 3+ have 1" margins on the left and 0.8" margins on the right. I suggest using 0.9" margins on both sides on all pages. --- comment number 32 Page=17 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= Published standard and technical report references s/b Approved references --- comment number 33 Page=18 Subtype=StrikeOut Subj=Cross-Out Author=RElliott Comment= Delete: and Class 4 as it is obsolete in FC-FS-3 --- comment number 34 Page=18 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= SCSI commands s/b commands and task management function requests --- comment number 35 Page=18 Subtype=StrikeOut Subj=Cross-Out Author=RElliott Comment= Delete: 3.1.5 autosense data: Sense data (see 3.1.50) that is returned in the FCP_RSP IU payload. See SAM-4. SAM-4 no longer defines such a term. Separate comments are provided to dispose of each use of autosense. --- comment number 36 Page=18 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= after: command descriptor block add: (CDB) --- comment number 37 Page=18 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= tasks s/b commands --- comment number 38 Page=18 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= See SAM-4. s/b See 6.3 and 9.3. --- comment number 39 Page=18 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= SCSI command s/b command --- comment number 40 Page=18 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= Copies of these INCITS T10 and T11 draft standards and technical reports are available for purchase from Global Engineering Documents. For further information, contact Global Engineering Documents at 800-854-7179 (phone) or 303-792-2181 (phone) or by mail at 15 Inverness Way East, Englewood, CO 80122-5704. The INCITS T10 draft standards are also available on the web site www.t10.org. The INCITS T11 draft standards and technical reports are also available on the web site www.t11.org. s/b NOTE - For more information on the current status of these documents, contact the INCITS Secretariat at 202-737-8888 (phone), 202-638-4922 (fax) or via Email at incits)itic.org. To obtain copies of these documents, contact Global Engineering at 15 Inverness Way, East Englewood, CO 80112-5704 at 303-792-2181 (phone), 800-854-7179 (phone), or 303-792-2192 (fax) or see http://www.incits.org. and delete the first paragraph in 2.3 as well --- comment number 41 Page=18 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= The following references are the product of the SFF committee. For information on the current status and availability of the documents, contact the SFF committee at 408-867-6630 (phone) or by mail at 14426 Black Walnut Court, Saratoga, CA 95070. s/b NOTE - For more information on the current status of SFF documents, contact the SFF Committee at 408-867-6630 (phone), or 408-867-2115 (fax). To obtain copies of these documents, contact the SFF Committee at 14426 Black Walnut Court, Saratoga, CA 95070 at 408-867-6630 (phone) or 408-741-1600 (fax) or see http://www.sffcommittee.org. following the SFF line rather than preceding it --- comment number 42 Page=19 Subtype=StrikeOut Subj=Cross-Out Author=RElliott Comment= Delete: 3.1.26 initiator: A SCSI device containing application clients that originate device service requests and task management functions to be processed by a target SCSI device. In this standard, the word initiator also refers to an FCP_Port using the Fibre Channel Protocol to perform the SCSI initiator functions defined by SAM-4. and get rid of any bare "initiator"s that remain in the text. (Separate comments provided for several of them) --- comment number 43 Page=19 Subtype=StrikeOut Subj=Cross-Out Author=RElliott Comment= or of a SCSI target/initiator port when operating as a SCSI initiator port --- comment number 44 Page=19 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= fully qualified exchange identifier s/b fully qualified Exchange identifier (FQXID) --- comment number 45 Page=19 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= an Originator Exchange_ID (OX_ID) and a Responder Exchange_Identifier (RX_ID) s/b OX_ID and RX_ID --- comment number 46 Page=19 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= sequence s/b Sequence --- comment number 47 Page=19 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= sequence s/b Sequence --- comment number 48 Page=19 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= sequence s/b Sequence --- comment number 49 Page=19 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= manages tasks to process s/b manages and processes --- comment number 50 Page=19 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= add: s/b In this standard, the address identifier of the initiator FCP_Port is an initiator port identifier. --- comment number 51 Page=19 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= SCSI Command s/b command --- comment number 52 Page=20 Subtype=StrikeOut Subj=Cross-Out Author=RElliott Comment= Delete a series of linked SCSI commands, Linked commands are obsolete in SAM-4. --- comment number 53 Page=20 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= 3.1.40Port Identifier: An address identifier (see 3.1.2) assigned to an N_Port or NL_Port during implicit or explicit fabric login (see FC-LS). Either a) delete this term and use "address identifier" everywhere it is used. b) change this to N_Port_ID, which is the term defined and used in FC-FS-3. --- comment number 54 Page=20 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= Data returned to an application client as a result of an autosense operation or REQUEST SENSE command. See SPC-4. s/b Data describing an error or exceptional condition that a device server delivers to an application client in an FCP_RSP frame along with a CHECK CONDITION status or as parameter data in response to a REQUEST SENSE command. See SPC-4. --- comment number 55 Page=20 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= Port_Name s/b N_Port_Name to match FC-FS-3. (separate comments added for each use in the text) --- comment number 56 Page=20 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= after: . add: See FC-FS-3. --- comment number 57 Page=20 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= after: Data frames add: (see 3.1.11) --- comment number 58 Page=20 Subtype=Text Subj=Note Author=RElliott Comment= Add Sequence_ID (SEQ_ID): An identifier used to identify a Sequence. See FC-FS-3. --- comment number 59 Page=20 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= Originator Exchange Identifier s/b Originator Exchange_ID (OX_ID) to match FC-FS-3 --- comment number 60 Page=20 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= Responder Exchange Identifier s/b Responser Exchange_ID (RX_ID) to match FC-FS-3 --- comment number 61 Page=20 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= N_Port to another N_Port s/b Nx_Port to another Nx_Port - but - this standard doesn't define Nx_Port. --- comment number 62 Page=21 Subtype=Text Subj=Note Author=RElliott Comment= Delete the . from the end of most of the abbreviation lines (e.g., in ABTS, ABTS-LS, ... but not in ID. LS, ...) --- comment number 63 Page=21 Subtype=StrikeOut Subj=Cross-Out Author=RElliott Comment= Delete or group of linked commands Linked commands are obsolete in SAM-4. --- comment number 64 Page=21 Subtype=Text Subj=Note Author=RElliott Comment= Add: CDB command descriptor block (see 3.1.7) --- comment number 65 Page=21 Subtype=StrikeOut Subj=Cross-Out Author=RElliott Comment=unsigned binary --- comment number 66 Page=21 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= identifer s/b identifier --- comment number 67 Page=21 Subtype=StrikeOut Subj=Cross-Out Author=RElliott Comment= or of a SCSI target/initiator port when operating as a SCSI target port --- comment number 68 Page=21 Subtype=StrikeOut Subj=Cross-Out Author=RElliott Comment= In all cases when this term is used it refers to an initiator port or a SCSI target/initiator port operating as a SCSI initiator port. --- comment number 69 Page=21 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= A peer-to-peer confirmed service provided by a task manager that may be invoked by an application client to affect the processing of one or more tasks s/b A task manager service capable of being requested by an application client to affect the processing of one or more commands --- comment number 70 Page=21 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= The queuing specification for a task s/b An attribute of a command that specifies the processing relationship of the command with regard to other commands in the task set --- comment number 71 Page=21 Subtype=StrikeOut Subj=Cross-Out Author=RElliott Comment= Delete 3.1.61 task: That term was eradicated from SAM-4. --- comment number 72 Page=21 Subtype=StrikeOut Subj=Cross-Out Author=RElliott Comment=that contains a task router and --- comment number 73 Page=21 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= indications and responses s/b requests, indications, responses, and confirmations --- comment number 74 Page=21 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= requests, indications, responses, and confirmations s/b requests and confirmations --- comment number 75 Page=21 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= In this standard, the term SCSI initiator port also refers to an FCP_Port using the Fibre Channel protocol to perform the SCSI initiator port functions defined by SAM-4. s/b In this standard, an initiator FCP_Port is a SCSI initiator port. --- comment number 76 Page=21 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= In this standard, the term SCSI target port also refers to an FCP_Port using the Fibre Channel protocol to perform the SCSI target port functions defined by SAM-4. s/b In this standard, an target FCP_Port is a SCSI target port. --- comment number 77 Page=21 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= An address identifier (see 3.1.2) that a SCSI initiator port uses to identify the SCSI target port. s/b A value by which a SCSI target port is identified in a domain. In this standard, the address identifier of a target FCP_Port is a target port identifier. --- comment number 78 Page=22 Subtype=Text Subj=Note Author=RElliott Comment= Add SEQ_ID Sequence_ID --- comment number 79 Page=22 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= (see FC-FS-3) s/b (see 3.1.xx) --- comment number 80 Page=22 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= (see FC-FS-3) s/b (see 3.1.xx) --- comment number 81 Page=22 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= exchange s/b Exchange --- comment number 82 Page=24 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Comment on Text Author=curtisb Comment=Use the table from SSC-3 which includes the 3.14159265 example --- comment number 83 Page=25 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= two ports s/b two NL_Ports --- comment number 84 Page=25 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= a port on the loop and a port on a switching fabric s/b a NL_Port on the loop an an N_Port on a switching fabric --- comment number 85 Page=25 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Comment on Text Author=curtisb Comment=Seems extraneous - suggest this editorial comment be stricken. --- comment number 86 Page=26 Subtype=StrikeOut Subj=Cross-Out Author=RElliott Comment= Delete or a list of linked requests Linked commands are obsolete in SAM-4. --- comment number 87 Page=26 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= Expand: Send SCSI Command request | Unsolicited command IU (FCP_CMND) to Send SCSI Command request | Sending an unsolicited command IU (FCP_CMND) SCSI Command Received indication | Receiving an unsolicited command IU (FCP_CMND) --- comment number 88 Page=26 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= Expand: Send Command Complete response | Command status IU (FCP_ RSP) into: Send Command Complete response | Sending a command status IU (FCP_ RSP) Command Complete Received confirmation | Receiving a command status IU (FCP_ RSP) --- comment number 89 Page=26 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= Data delivery request | Data descriptor IU (FCP_XFER_RDY) s/b Receive Data-Out request | Data descriptor IU (FCP_XFER_RDY) Data-Out Received confirmation | Receipt of solicited data IU (FCP_DATA) --- comment number 90 Page=26 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= Data delivery action | Solicited data IU (FCP_DATA) s/b Send Data-In request | Sending solicited data IO (FCP_DATA) Data-In Delivered confirmation | depends on class of service --- comment number 91 Page=26 Subtype=Text Subj=Note Author=RElliott Comment= Add: Send Task Management request | sending the FCP equivalent specified in table 3 in 4.9 Task Management Request Received indication | receiving the FCP equivalent specified in see 4.9 Task Management Function Executed response | sending the response specified in table 4 in 4.9.1, table 5 in 4.9.2, or table 6 in 4.9.3 Received Task Management Function Executed response | receiving the response specified in table 4 in 4.9.1, table 5 in 4.9.2, or table 6 in 4.9.3 --- comment number 92 Page=26 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= FCP_Port that is the initiator for the command s/b initiator FCP_Port --- comment number 93 Page=26 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= initiator s/b initiator FCP_Port --- comment number 94 Page=26 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= target s/b target FCP_Port --- comment number 95 Page=26 Subtype=StrikeOut Subj=Cross-Out Author=RElliott Comment=. --- comment number 96 Page=26 Subtype=StrikeOut Subj=Cross-Out Author=RElliott Comment= Delete: invoke the Send SCSI Command SCSI transport protocol service request (see SAM-4) and the application client already invoked it. --- comment number 97 Page=26 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= When s/b If Since not all commands are writes, this is just one possibility. --- comment number 98 Page=26 Subtype=Text Subj=Note Author=RElliott Comment= In 4.2, either embed the "or task management function" concept throughout the description, or make these paragraphs dedicated for commands and add another set of paragraphs for task management functions. Right now, the first paragraph mentions both, but subsequent paragraphs only mention commands. --- comment number 99 Page=26 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= Send Task Management request s/b Send Task Management Request --- comment number 100 Page=26 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= it transmits a data descriptor IU containing the FCP_XFER_RDY IU payload to the s/b it invokes the Receive Data-Out transport protocol service request and the target FCP_Port transmits a data descriptor IU containing the FCP_XFER_RDY IU payload to the --- comment number 101 Page=26 Subtype=StrikeOut Subj=Cross-Out Author=RElliott Comment= The FCP_XFER_RDY IU and FCP_DATA IU payloads constitute the Receive Data-Out protocol service request and Data-Out Received service confirmation described in SAM-4. --- comment number 102 Page=26 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= Protocol Service s/b transport protocol service --- comment number 103 Page=26 Subtype=StrikeOut Subj=Cross-Out Author=RElliott Comment= Delete: REQ/ACK for Command Complete Confirmation IU (FCP_CONF) SAM-4 doesn't discuss confirming the Send Command Complete response or the Task Management Function Executed response; the device server just invokes it and hopes it works. --- comment number 104 Page=26 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= SCSI command s/b command --- comment number 105 Page=26 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= SCSI command s/b command --- comment number 106 Page=26 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= SCSI command s/b command --- comment number 107 Page=26 Subtype=StrikeOut Subj=Cross-Out Author=RElliott Comment=SCSI --- comment number 108 Page=27 Subtype=StrikeOut Subj=Cross-Out Author=RElliott Comment= Delete (Linked commands are obsolete in SAM-4): command linking, --- comment number 109 Page=27 Subtype=StrikeOut Subj=Cross-Out Author=RElliott Comment= Delete (Linked commands are obsolete in SAM-4): The device server determines whether additional linked commands are to be performed in the FCP I/O operation. If this is the last or only command processed in the FCP I/O operation, the FCP I/O operation and the Exchange are terminated. (note: there may be need to keep part of the second sentence) --- comment number 110 Page=27 Subtype=StrikeOut Subj=Cross-Out Author=RElliott Comment= Delete (Linked commands are obsolete in SAM-4): If the command is linked to another command, the FCP_RSP IU payload shall contain the proper status (i.e., INTERMEDIATE or INTERMEDIATE-CONDITION MET) indicating that another command shall be processed.The target FCP_Port shall present the FCP_RSP using the IU that allows command linking, I5 (see 9.1). The initiator FCP_Port shall continue the same Exchange with an FCP_CMND IU, beginning the next SCSI --- comment number 111 Page=27 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= autosense data s/b sense data --- comment number 112 Page=27 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= autosense data s/b sense data --- comment number 113 Page=27 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= initiator and target s/b initiator FCP_Port and target FCP_Port --- comment number 114 Page=27 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= initiator s/b initiator FCP_Port --- comment number 115 Page=27 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= initiator and target s/b initiator FCP_Port and target FCP_Port --- comment number 116 Page=27 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= SCSI device s/b SCSI target device --- comment number 117 Page=27 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= initiator s/b SCSI initiator device --- comment number 118 Page=27 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= When s/b If --- comment number 119 Page=27 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= When s/b If --- comment number 120 Page=27 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= transmits s/b invokes --- comment number 121 Page=27 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= return s/b invoke --- comment number 122 Page=27 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= returned information is used to prepare and return s/b the initiator FCP_Port uses returned information to invoke --- comment number 123 Page=27 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= , s/b , then --- comment number 124 Page=27 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= , s/b , then --- comment number 125 Page=27 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= , s/b , then --- comment number 126 Page=27 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= , s/b , then --- comment number 127 Page=27 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= , s/b , then --- comment number 128 Page=27 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= , s/b , then --- comment number 129 Page=27 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= sequence s/b Sequence --- comment number 130 Page=27 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= the target FCP_Port transmits a solicited data IU to the initiator FCP_Port. The solicited data IU shall contain the FCP_DATA IU payload. The FCP_DATA IU constitutes the Send Data-In protocol service request described in SAM-4. s/b it invokes the Send Data-In transport protocol service request (see SAM-4) and the target FCP_Port transmits a solicited data IU containing the FCP_DATA IU payload to the initiator FCP_Port. --- comment number 131 Page=27 Subtype=StrikeOut Subj=Cross-Out Author=RElliott Comment= The FCP_XFER_RDY IU and FCP_DATA IU payloads constitute the Receive Data-Out protocol service request and Data-Out Received service confirmation described in SAM-4. --- comment number 132 Page=27 Subtype=StrikeOut Subj=Cross-Out Author=RElliott Comment= The FCP_DATA IU constitutes the Send Data-In protocol service request described in SAM-4. --- comment number 133 Page=27 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= it transmits a data descriptor IU containing the FCP_XFER_RDY IU payload s/b it invokes the Receive Data Out transport protocol service and the target FCP_Port transmits a data descriptor IU containing the FCP_XFER_RDY IU payload --- comment number 134 Page=27 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= the solicited data IU to the target FCP_Port. The solicited data IU shall contain the FCP_DATA IU payload requested by the FCP_XFER_RDY IU. s/b a solicited data IU containing the FCP_DATA IU payload requested by the FCP_XFER_RDY IU (match wording in the write operation paragraph) --- comment number 135 Page=27 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= the target FCP_Port transmits a solicited data IU to the initiator FCP_Port. The solicited data IU shall contain the FCP_DATA IU payload. s/b it invokes the Send Data-In transport protocol service request (see SAM-4) and the target FCP_Port transmits a solicited data IU containing the FCP_DATA IU payload to the initiator FCP_Port. --- comment number 136 Page=27 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= add: , except that only one Data-In or Data-Out transfer operation is allowed at a time in an Exchange. --- comment number 137 Page=27 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= protocol service response s/b transport protocol service response --- comment number 138 Page=27 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= by requesting the transmission of an IU s/b and the target FCP_Port transmits a command status IU --- comment number 139 Page=27 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= protocol service confirmation s/b transport protocol service confirmation --- comment number 140 Page=27 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= to the application client that requested the operation. s/b to notify the application client. --- comment number 141 Page=27 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= a protocol service indication that confirms delivery s/b confirmed delivery (this does not fit into anything defined by SAM-4, so calling it a "protocol service indication" is inappropriate) --- comment number 142 Page=27 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= SCSI command s/b command --- comment number 143 Page=27 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= SCSI command s/b command --- comment number 144 Page=27 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= SCSI command s/b command --- comment number 145 Page=27 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= SCSI command s/b command --- comment number 146 Page=28 Subtype=StrikeOut Subj=Cross-Out Author=RElliott Comment= Delete (Linked commands are obsolete in SAM-4): command. All SCSI commands linked in the FCP I/O operation except the last are processed in the manner described above. SAM-4 defines the cases that interrupt and terminate a series of linked commands. In those cases, the FCP_RSP IU of the last command in the set of linked commands shall be transmitted using the IU that does not allow command linking, I4 (see 9.1). See 4.5. --- comment number 147 Page=28 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= were s/b where --- comment number 148 Page=28 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= initiator s/b SCSI initiator port --- comment number 149 Page=28 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= bit s/b bit to one --- comment number 150 Page=28 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= page. See 10.3. s/b page (see 10.3). --- comment number 151 Page=28 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= , s/b , then --- comment number 152 Page=28 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= , s/b , then --- comment number 153 Page=28 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= , s/b , then --- comment number 154 Page=28 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Comment on Text Author=curtisb Comment= Why is this necessary? It says right above that unidirectional payloads shall use the unidirectional FCP_RSP so by definition device servers that do not support bidirectional commands can't use the bidirectional FCP_RSP --- comment number 155 Page=28 Subtype=StrikeOut Subj=Cross-Out Author=curtisb Comment= --- comment number 156 Page=28 Subtype=Caret Subj=Inserted Text Author=curtisb Comment=where --- comment number 157 Page=28 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= SCSI commands s/b commands --- comment number 158 Page=28 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= SCSI commands s/b commands --- comment number 159 Page=29 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= initiator s/b initiator FCP_Port --- comment number 160 Page=29 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= initiator s/b initiator FCP_Port --- comment number 161 Page=29 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= "and for task management functions" is incorrect. The CRN itself simply does not exist for task management functions. The COMMAND REFERENCE NUMBER field in the FCP_CMND IU does exist when that IU is being used to deliver a task management request, and it is set to zero in that case. --- comment number 162 Page=29 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= There is no "CRN field". There is a CRN (uppercase) described in the text above, and a COMMAND REFERENCE NUMBER (smallcaps) field in the FCP_CMND IU. They are not the same. --- comment number 163 Page=29 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= receipt of Convert into an A)B)C) list --- comment number 164 Page=29 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= CRN set to zero is meaningless for task management functions - SAM-4 defines no such thing. The FCP_CMND IU COMMAND REFERENCE NUMBER (smallcaps) field, however, does exist, and is set to zero for TMFs. --- comment number 165 Page=29 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= that used s/b that are used --- comment number 166 Page=29 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= FCP devices s/b device servers --- comment number 167 Page=29 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= , s/b , then --- comment number 168 Page=29 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= , s/b , then --- comment number 169 Page=29 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= protocol service s/b transport protocol service --- comment number 170 Page=29 Subtype=StrikeOut Subj=Cross-Out Author=curtisb Comment= --- comment number 171 Page=29 Subtype=Caret Subj=Replacement Text Author=curtisb Comment=i.e., --- comment number 172 Page=29 Subtype=StrikeOut Subj=Cross-Out Author=curtisb Comment= --- comment number 173 Page=29 Subtype=Caret Subj=Replacement Text Author=curtisb Comment=that are used --- comment number 174 Page=30 Subtype=StrikeOut Subj=Cross-Out Author=RElliott Comment= Delete (Linked commands are obsolete in SAM-4): If command linking is being performed, the target FCP_Port shall not request confirmed completion for an FCP_RSP IU containing INTERMEDIATE or INTERMEDIATE-CONDITION MET status. The target FCP_Port may request confirmed completion: a)when providing the FCP_RSP IU for the last command of the set of linked commands; or b)when providing the FCP_RSP IU for a command that terminates linking because of an error or CHECK CONDITION status. --- comment number 175 Page=30 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= autosense data s/b sense data --- comment number 176 Page=30 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= autosense data s/b sense data --- comment number 177 Page=30 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= initiators and targets s/b SCSI initiator devices and SCSI target devices --- comment number 178 Page=30 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= : s/b , then: --- comment number 179 Page=30 Subtype=Text Subj=Note Author=RElliott Comment= Item b) "shall support" is not well-placed in a list prefaced by "If an error is identified by..." The "shall support" statement is true even if an error is not identified yet. Split out that rule to be based on only "if data retransmission capability is supported..." --- comment number 180 Page=30 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= , s/b , then --- comment number 181 Page=30 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= queued SCSI command s/b command --- comment number 182 Page=30 Subtype=StrikeOut Subj=Cross-Out Author=RElliott Comment=queued --- comment number 183 Page=31 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= shall be zero s/b shall be set to zero --- comment number 184 Page=31 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= , s/b , then --- comment number 185 Page=31 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= , s/b , then --- comment number 186 Page=33 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= QUERY UNIT ATTENTION s/b QUERY ASYNCHONOUS EVENT to match final SAM-4 --- comment number 187 Page=33 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= FCP_QUERY_UNIT_ATTENTION s/b FCP_QUERY_ASYNCHRONOUS_EVENT to match final SAM-4 --- comment number 188 Page=33 Subtype=StrikeOut Subj=Cross-Out Author=RElliott Comment= Delete: a) FC-FS-3 BLSs are used to perform the ABORT TASK task management function. There is no such footnote for QUERY TASK/REC ELS (see FC-LS), and it doesn't seem to provide any new information. --- comment number 189 Page=33 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= (see FC-FS-3) s/b (see 4.9.2 and FC-FS-3) --- comment number 190 Page=33 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= (see FC-LS) s/b (see 4.9.3 and FC-LS) --- comment number 191 Page=33 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= the s/b , then the --- comment number 192 Page=33 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= Exchnage s/b Exchange --- comment number 193 Page=33 Subtype=StrikeOut Subj=Cross-Out Author=curtisb Comment= --- comment number 194 Page=33 Subtype=Caret Subj=Replacement Text Author=curtisb Comment=Exchange --- comment number 195 Page=34 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= functions s/b function --- comment number 196 Page=34 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= task s/b command --- comment number 197 Page=34 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= task abort events s/b something else --- comment number 198 Page=35 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= functions s/b function --- comment number 199 Page=36 Subtype=Text Subj=Note Author=RElliott Comment=Change to lettered table footnotes, delete "NOTES:" --- comment number 200 Page=36 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= , s/b , then --- comment number 201 Page=36 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= , s/b , then --- comment number 202 Page=36 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= ABTS (Sequence) s/b ABTS --- comment number 203 Page=36 Subtype=Text Subj=Note Author=RElliott Comment=Merge Clearing effect cell with blank cell above --- comment number 204 Page=37 Subtype=Text Subj=Note Author=RElliott Comment= Make the Clearing effect column in table 8 wider so the "Only for FCP Sequences associated with Aborted FCP Exchanges" line doesn't wrap --- comment number 205 Page=37 Subtype=Text Subj=Note Author=RElliott Comment=Change to lettered table footnotes, delete "NOTES:" --- comment number 206 Page=37 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= , s/b , then --- comment number 207 Page=37 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= reason code s/b a Reason Code set to --- comment number 208 Page=37 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= reason code explanation s/b a Reason Code Explanation set to --- comment number 209 Page=37 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Comment on Text Author=curtisb Comment=Is this a "shall respond" or a "may respond"? --- comment number 210 Page=37 Subtype=Text Subj=Note Author=RElliott Comment=Fix double-line on top right --- comment number 211 Page=37 Subtype=Text Subj=Note Author=RElliott Comment=Merge Clearing effect cell with blank cell above --- comment number 212 Page=38 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= shall assign the new initiator port identifier to the existing registration and reservation to the initiator FCP_Port having the same Worldwide_Name is unclear, and Worldwide_Name is misused. Reword as an a)b) list: shall a) assign the new initiator port identifier to the existing registration b) set the reservation holder to the initiator FCP_Port having the same N_Port_Name. --- comment number 213 Page=38 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= between s/b between the --- comment number 214 Page=38 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= 3. Each start new paragraph with "Each" to separate the address identifier definition from the FQXID definition --- comment number 215 Page=38 Subtype=Text Subj=Note Author=RElliott Comment= Mention that the RX_ID field value does not exist at the beginning of the FCP I/O operation, and it may change during the FCP I/O operation. --- comment number 216 Page=38 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= Port_Name s/b N_Port_Name --- comment number 217 Page=38 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= Worldwide_Name s/b N_Port_Name --- comment number 218 Page=38 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= after: The Worldwide_Name for the FCP_Port shall be different from the Worldwide_Name for the node add: (i.e., the N_Port_Name shall be different from the Node_Name). --- comment number 219 Page=38 Subtype=Text Subj=Note Author=RElliott Comment= Add: "Each FCP device should include a SCSI device name in NAA IEEE Registered format (see SPC-4). If the FCP device includes a Platform Name (see FC-GS-6), then the Platform Name shall be the same as the SCSI device name. In the Device Identification VPD page, a device server in an FCP target device that implements a SCSI device name: a) shall report the SCSI device name in binary NAA format; and b) should report the SCSI device name in SCSI name string format (e.g., "naa." followed by 16 hexadecimal digits followed by 4 ASCII null characters)." Also add this to the SAM-5 names & identifiers annex (IEEE Registered format, 8 bytes). SAM-4 allows a transport protocol to mandate implementing device names and define their format. Node names were never well defined in FC, always unclear whether they named a Port, an HBA (a set of Ports on the same card), or a system (set of cards in a system). They are thus worthless. Platform name supposedly provides clearer guidance, identifying the entire system - the same scope as a SCSI device name. With NPIV and server virtualization gaining popularity, it would be helpful to have a unique identifier for each operating system instance, reported through all the SCSI initiator ports (whether NPIV or physical) that the operating system uses. If the operating system instance is shut down and restarted on a different physical machine, that identifier should move with it. This identifier should even work if the operating system has access to a mix of protocols - e.g. some FCP ports, some iSCSI ports, and some SAS ports. The same NAA IEEE Registered identifier can be reported and used in FCP (both binary and as a "naa." string) , SAS (both binary and as a "naa." string) and iSCSI (as a "naa." string). A system that doesn't have iSCSI ports could just report the binary NAA format. The device name would be helpful for configuring V-SANs, zoning, SCSI access controls, etc. For example, the system administrator could grant certain zoning permissions to an operating system instance, no matter which physical machine it happens to be running on and which ports it happens to be using. --- comment number 220 Page=38 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= World Wide Names s/b Worldwide_Names --- comment number 221 Page=38 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= each Fibre Channel node and each Fibre Channel port shall have a Worldwide_Name s/b each Fibre Channel node shall have a Node_Name that is a Worldwide_Name and each Fibre Channel port shall have an N_Port_Name that is a Worldwide_Name. --- comment number 222 Page=38 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= , s/b , then --- comment number 223 Page=38 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= task identifier s/b command identifier --- comment number 224 Page=39 Subtype=Text Subj=Note Author=RElliott Comment= FC-FS-3 divides R_CTL into two fields: ROUTING and INFORMATION. FCP-4 should say something like: "The R_CTL field is subdivided into a ROUTING field and an INFORMATION field (see FC-FS-3). The ROUTING field shall be set to 0h (i.e. Device_Data) and the INFORMATION field shall be set to the value defined in table 19 and table 20." Or, change table 19 and table 20 to relate the full byte value for R_CTL, and ignore the subfields. Change entries like 6 to 06h --- comment number 225 Page=39 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= value in the TYPE field shall be 08h s/b TYPE field shall be set to 08h (i.e., Fibre Channel Protocol)... (see FC-FS-3). --- comment number 226 Page=39 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= 31- 24 s/b 31-24 (no space) to match the other column headers in this table --- comment number 227 Page=40 Subtype=Text Subj=Note Author=RElliott Comment= FC-FS-3 has some more specific rules about RX_ID assignment that clarify the only time the target FCP_Port is allowed to select the RX_ID: "The Responder of the Exchange shall set a unique value for RX_ID other than FF FFh, if RX_ID is being used, by one of two methods: a) in an ACK to a Data frame in the first Sequence of an Exchange in Class 1 and 2; or b) in the first Sequence transmitted as a Sequence Initiator, if any, in Class 3." FCP's statement "until the Exchange Responder assigns a different value in its response to the Exchange Originator" is looser than that, and should be tightened. --- comment number 228 Page=40 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= FCP type (i.e., 08h) s/b TYPE field set to 08h (i.e., Fibre Channel Protocol). --- comment number 229 Page=40 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= For frames of the solicited data category (i.e., FCP_DATA IUs) (see 9.1 and 9.4) s/f For a frame with the R_CTL field set to 01h (i.e., solicited data)(i.e., an FCP_DATA IU), --- comment number 230 Page=40 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= For frames of the unsolicited control category (i.e., FCP_CMND IUs) (see 9.1 and 9.2) s/b For a frame with the R_CTL field set to 02h (i.e., unsolicited control)(i.e., an FCP_CMND IU) FCP_CMND IU is described as having R_CTL of 06h in table 19, which means "Unsolicited command" not "Unsolicited control" according to FC-FS-3. So, the current "i.e." doesn't match the text. Decide if 02h, 06h, or both are intended, and word the text accordingly. --- comment number 231 Page=40 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= For all other Device_Data frames with the FCP type (i.e., 08h) s/bFor a frame with R_CTL set to 0xh other than 01h and 02h, --- comment number 232 Page=40 Subtype=StrikeOut Subj=Cross-Out Author=RElliott Comment= For the solicited data category (FCP_DATA IUs) The paragraph is already restricted to that case --- comment number 233 Page=40 Subtype=StrikeOut Subj=Cross-Out Author=RElliott Comment= For solicited data category frames, The paragraph is already restricted to that case --- comment number 234 Page=40 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= contain a value of zero s/b be set to zero --- comment number 235 Page=40 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= , s/b , then --- comment number 236 Page=40 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= , s/b , then --- comment number 237 Page=41 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= sucessfully s/c successfully --- comment number 238 Page=41 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= WWPN s/b Port_Name --- comment number 239 Page=41 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= WWPN s/b Port_Name --- comment number 240 Page=41 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= If multiple images are required in an initiator FCP_Port, they shall be provided by transparent aliasing of the N_Port Identifier of the initiator FCP_Port. If multiple images are required in a target FCP_Port, they shall be provided by SCSI logical units. 1. Mention NPIV instead. 2. Downgrade the "shall"s. On the target side, supporting NPIV is also feasible - multiple logical units are not the only solution. --- comment number 241 Page=41 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= Note 1 s/b NOTE 1 and the text should use 9pt font. --- comment number 242 Page=41 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= , s/b , then --- comment number 243 Page=41 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= , s/b , then --- comment number 244 Page=42 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= 6.3.2 Process_Associator requirements 6.2 already prohibits using Process_Associatiors, so section 6.3.2 should not exist. --- comment number 245 Page=42 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= , s/b , then --- comment number 246 Page=42 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= , s/b , then --- comment number 247 Page=42 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= , s/b , then --- comment number 248 Page=43 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= (See FC-FS-3.) s/b See FC-LS. --- comment number 249 Page=43 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= SCSI FCP (08h) s/b TYPE CODE (08h for this standard) --- comment number 250 Page=43 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= VALID s/b VALIDITY to match FC-LS. Also change below the table. --- comment number 251 Page=43 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= VALID s/b VALIDITY to match FC-LS. Also change below the table. --- comment number 252 Page=43 Subtype=Text Subj=Note Author=RElliott Comment= Add a row after word 2 with double lines: Service Parameters highlighting that all the fields that follow are part of that section. --- comment number 253 Page=43 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= FCP_XFER_RDY make this smallcaps. Below the table too. --- comment number 254 Page=43 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= FCP_XFER_RDY make this smallcaps. Below the table too. --- comment number 255 Page=43 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= FCP specific code s/b TYPE CODE --- comment number 256 Page=43 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= OBSOLETE s/b Obsolete --- comment number 257 Page=43 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= OBSOLETE s/b Obsolete --- comment number 258 Page=43 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= ORIGINATOR PROCESS_ASSOCIATOR s/b all small caps --- comment number 259 Page=43 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= RESPONDER PROCESS_ASSOCIATOR s/b all small caps --- comment number 260 Page=43 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= ESTABLISH IMAGE PAIR s/b all small caps --- comment number 261 Page=43 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= ORIGINATOR PROCESS_ASSOCIATOR s/b all small caps --- comment number 262 Page=43 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= RESPONDER PROCESS_ASSOCIATOR s/b all small caps --- comment number 263 Page=43 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= Bit s/b Bit(s) --- comment number 264 Page=44 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= default logical units This term needs to be defined. I understand the intent is to ignore RAID control logical units, but report RAID volumes. --- comment number 265 Page=44 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= ENHANCED DISCOVERY This bit name is rather vague. A name that better represents the functionality would be better. --- comment number 266 Page=44 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= REC_SUPPORT Get rid of the _ since other bits do not use it --- comment number 267 Page=44 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= VALID s/b VALIDITY --- comment number 268 Page=44 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= VALID s/b VALIDITY --- comment number 269 Page=44 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= VALID s/b VALIDITY --- comment number 270 Page=44 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= VALID s/b VALIDITY --- comment number 271 Page=44 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= VALID s/b VALIDITY --- comment number 272 Page=44 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= VALID s/b VALIDITY --- comment number 273 Page=44 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= , s/b , then --- comment number 274 Page=44 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= , s/b , then --- comment number 275 Page=44 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= , s/b , then --- comment number 276 Page=44 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= , s/b , then --- comment number 277 Page=44 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= , s/b , then --- comment number 278 Page=44 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= When the REC ELS supported (REC_SUPPORT) bit is set to one, the Originator is indicating that it supports, as an initiator FCP_Port, the transmission of the REC ELS. s/b a REC ELS Supported (REC_SUPPORT) bit set to one specifies that the Originator, as an initiator FCP_Port, supports the transmission of the REC ELS. --- comment number 279 Page=44 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= When the REC_SUPPORT bit is set to zero, the Originator is providing no information about whether it supports transmission of the REC ELS. s/b A REC_SUPPORT bit set to zero provides no information about whether or not the Originator supports transmission of the REC ELS. --- comment number 280 Page=44 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= When the TASK RETRY IDENTIFICATION REQUESTED bit is set to one, the Originator of the PRLI ELS requests that task retry identification (see 4.7) be used. s/b A TASK RETRY IDENTIFICATION REQUESTED bit set to one requests that task retry identification (see 4.7) be used --- comment number 281 Page=44 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= When the TASK RETRY IDENTIFICATION REQUESTED bit is set to zero by either the Originator of or the Responder to the PRLI ELS, task retry identification shall not be used. s/b A TASK RETRY IDENTIFICATION REQUESTED bit set to zero specifies that task retry identification shall not be used. --- comment number 282 Page=44 Subtype=Text Subj=Note Author=RElliott Comment= Reword the "When" sentences in the other field descriptions, as suggested for bit 10 and bit 9. --- comment number 283 Page=45 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= , s/b , then --- comment number 284 Page=45 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= , s/b , then --- comment number 285 Page=45 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= , s/b , then --- comment number 286 Page=45 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= , s/b , then --- comment number 287 Page=45 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= a target s/b the target --- comment number 288 Page=45 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= , s/b , then --- comment number 289 Page=45 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= a target s/b the target --- comment number 290 Page=45 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= process s/b Originator or Responder --- comment number 291 Page=45 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= process s/b Originator or Responder --- comment number 292 Page=45 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= , s/b , then --- comment number 293 Page=45 Subtype=StrikeOut Subj=Cross-Out Author=curtisb Comment= --- comment number 294 Page=45 Subtype=Caret Subj=Replacement Text Author=curtisb Comment=only if the RETRY bit is set to one --- comment number 295 Page=45 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= command s/b SCSI command --- comment number 296 Page=46 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= SCSI write operation s/b write operation --- comment number 297 Page=46 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= all FCP I/O operations performing SCSI writes s/b write operations --- comment number 298 Page=47 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= SCSI FCP (08h) s/b TYPE CODE (08h for this standard) --- comment number 299 Page=47 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= VALID s/b VALIDITY --- comment number 300 Page=47 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= VALID s/b VALIDITY --- comment number 301 Page=47 Subtype=Text Subj=Note Author=RElliott Comment= Add a row after word 2 with double lines: Service Parameters highlighting that all the fields that follow are part of that section. --- comment number 302 Page=47 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= , s/b , then --- comment number 303 Page=47 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= after: ACCEPT RESPONSE CODE add: field --- comment number 304 Page=47 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= OBSOLETE s/b Obsolete --- comment number 305 Page=47 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= OBSOLETE s/b Obsolete --- comment number 306 Page=47 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= RETRY s/b all smallcaps (no uppercase R) --- comment number 307 Page=47 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= IMAGE PAIR ESTABLISHED s/b all small caps --- comment number 308 Page=47 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= ACCEPT RESPONSE CODE s/b all small caps --- comment number 309 Page=47 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= ORIGINATOR PROCESS_ASSOCIATOR s/b all small caps --- comment number 310 Page=47 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= RESPONDER PROCESS_ASSOCIATOR s/b all small caps --- comment number 311 Page=47 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= READ FCP_XFER_RDY DISABLED s/b all small caps --- comment number 312 Page=47 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= WRITE FCP_XFER_RDY DISABLED s/b all small caps --- comment number 313 Page=47 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= Bit s/b Bit(s) --- comment number 314 Page=48 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= , s/b , then --- comment number 315 Page=48 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= , s/b , then --- comment number 316 Page=48 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= after: ACCEPT RESPONSE CODE add: field --- comment number 317 Page=48 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= task s/b command --- comment number 318 Page=49 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= , s/b , then --- comment number 319 Page=49 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= bidirectional SCSI command s/b bidirectional command --- comment number 320 Page=50 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= FCP initiator function s/b initiator FCP_Port function --- comment number 321 Page=50 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= FCP target function s/b target FCP_Port function --- comment number 322 Page=51 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= reason code of s/b Reason Code set to --- comment number 323 Page=51 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= reason code explanation of s/b Reason Code Explanation set to --- comment number 324 Page=51 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= Encoded valueword 0 of payload(bits 31-24) s/b R_CTL (word 0 bits 31-24) --- comment number 325 Page=51 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= the R_CTL Information Category bits 27-24 s/b the R_CTL Information field (word 0 bits 27-24) --- comment number 326 Page=51 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= R_CTL bits 31-28 (Word 0) s/b the R_CTL Routing field (word 0 bits 31-28) --- comment number 327 Page=51 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= , s/b , then --- comment number 328 Page=51 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= , s/b , then --- comment number 329 Page=51 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= reason code of s/b Reason Code set to --- comment number 330 Page=51 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= reason code explanation of s/b Reason Code Explanation set to --- comment number 331 Page=51 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= , s/b , then --- comment number 332 Page=51 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= task s/b command --- comment number 333 Page=51 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Comment on Text Author=curtisb Comment= It should be more clear whether the preferred behavior is continuously increasing or rezero. --- comment number 334 Page=51 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= Abbr. is not a defined abbreviation in 3.2 There's no need to abbreviate here, though. Change the column header to "Name" and move this column left of the Description column. --- comment number 335 Page=52 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= This i.e. is unclear. FC-FS-3 doesn't mention FCP_XFER_RDY, FCP_RSP, or FCP_DATA. --- comment number 336 Page=52 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= 01h for Solicited Data or to 05h for Data Descriptor. s/b 01h (i.e., Device_Data/Solicited Data) or 05h (i.e., Device_Data/Data Descriptor). --- comment number 337 Page=52 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= a reason code of s/b a Reason Code set to --- comment number 338 Page=52 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= reason code explanation of s/b Reason Code Explanation set to --- comment number 339 Page=52 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= RELATIVE OFFSET parameter s/b RELATIVE OFFSET field --- comment number 340 Page=52 Subtype=Text Subj=Note Author=RElliott Comment=Add definitions of the OX_ID and RX_ID field. --- comment number 341 Page=52 Subtype=Text Subj=Note Author=RElliott Comment= Move the R_CTL FOR IU paragraph after the RELATIVE OFFSET paragraph. --- comment number 342 Page=52 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= In the event that s/b If --- comment number 343 Page=52 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= , s/b , then (matching adding "If" to the beginning of the sentence) --- comment number 344 Page=53 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= reason code and reason code explanation s/b Reason Code and Reason Code Explanation --- comment number 345 Page=53 Subtype=Text Subj=Note Author=RElliott Comment= FCP_ACC should have its own 8.x section, like FCP_RJT Add: 8.x FCP_LS Accept (FCP_ACC) Adjust the cross reference in table 13 --- comment number 346 Page=53 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= VENDOR SPECIFIC s/b Vendor specific --- comment number 347 Page=53 Subtype=StrikeOut Subj=Cross-Out Author=RElliott Comment= Delete: A four-byte reason code shall be contained in the Data_Field (see table 16). The Reason Code field is 1 byte, not 4 bytes, so this is incorrect. --- comment number 348 Page=54 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= The reason codes for FCP_RJT are specified in table 17. s/b The REASON CODE field is defined in table 17. --- comment number 349 Page=54 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= Table 18 lists the reason code explanations for FCP_LS requests. s/b The REASON CODE EXPLANATION field is defined in table 18. --- comment number 350 Page=54 Subtype=Text Subj=Note Author=RElliott Comment= Make the Description column narrower and the Meaning column wider, to shorten the table. Delete the double vertical line left of the Meaning column. Merge the Reserved row's Description and Meaning cells. --- comment number 351 Page=55 Subtype=StrikeOut Subj=Cross-Out Author=RElliott Comment= Delete T3 and T4 and add them to the list of obsolete IUs. Linked commands are obsolete in SAM-4. T3 Command request (Linked) 6 FCP_CMND M T O T4 Command request (Linked) 6 FCP_CMND M H O --- comment number 352 Page=55 Subtype=StrikeOut Subj=Cross-Out Author=RElliott Comment= Delete (Linked commands are obsolete in SAM-4): T3 and T4 are only permitted for linked SCSI commands. --- comment number 353 Page=55 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= Task Mgmt Rqst s/b Task management request --- comment number 354 Page=55 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= CAT Information category of Device_Data frames carrying the data block Change the column header name to INFORMATION field, which is what it is called in FC-FS-3. Change the entries to hex (e.g. 6h, 1h, 3h). or.... Change the column header to R_CTL and include two hex values (e.g., 06h, 01h, 03h). --- comment number 355 Page=55 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= when s/b while --- comment number 356 Page=55 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= sequence s/b Sequence --- comment number 357 Page=55 Subtype=StrikeOut Subj=Cross-Out Author=RElliott Comment=and T4 --- comment number 358 Page=55 Subtype=StrikeOut Subj=Cross-Out Author=RElliott Comment=and T4 --- comment number 359 Page=55 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= none s/b FCP_CONF Since section 9.6 exists, claiming to define FCP_CONF. The fact that it has no bytes is secondary. --- comment number 360 Page=55 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= SCSI primitive s/b Description since SCSI doesn't define anything called "primitive"s --- comment number 361 Page=55 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= I5 frame requesting the confirmed completion protocol. See table 20 By definition, the I5 frame requests confirmation. Otherwise, it'd be an I4 frame. Change to: "I5 frame (see table 20)." --- comment number 362 Page=56 Subtype=StrikeOut Subj=Cross-Out Author=RElliott Comment= Delete (Linked commands are obsolete in SAM-4): (Linked or confirm request) --- comment number 363 Page=56 Subtype=StrikeOut Subj=Cross-Out Author=RElliott Comment= Delete (Linked commands are obsolete in SAM-4): for linked SCSI commands or --- comment number 364 Page=56 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= Task Mgmt response s/b Task management response --- comment number 365 Page=56 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= , s/b , then --- comment number 366 Page=56 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= sequence s/b Sequence --- comment number 367 Page=56 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= SCSI primitive s/b Description since SCSI doesn't define anything called "primitive"s --- comment number 368 Page=56 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= Data delivery request s/b Data-Out delivery request to better match the wording in these two tables. --- comment number 369 Page=56 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= SCSI Command s/b command --- comment number 370 Page=57 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= managmenent s/b management --- comment number 371 Page=57 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= N s/b n in lowercase --- comment number 372 Page=57 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= The FCP_CMND IU shall contain the values and control fields defined in table 21 in its payload. s/b The format of the FCP_CMND IU payload is shown in table 21. to match other IU introductions --- comment number 373 Page=57 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= , s/b , then --- comment number 374 Page=57 Subtype=StrikeOut Subj=Cross-Out Author=RElliott Comment= Delete: Each target FCP_Port shall accept an INQUIRY command addressed to LUN 0. If LUNs other than zero are supported by the SCSI target device, LUN 0 shall implement the REPORT LUNS command. See SPC-4. SPC-4 defines that all logical units must support REPORT LUNS; there is no special rule for LUN 0 any more. --- comment number 375 Page=57 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= the s/b , then the --- comment number 376 Page=57 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= , s/b , then --- comment number 377 Page=57 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= PRIORITY s/b COMMAND PRIORITY to match SAM-4 --- comment number 378 Page=58 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= task s/b command --- comment number 379 Page=58 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= tasks s/b commands --- comment number 380 Page=58 Subtype=StrikeOut Subj=Cross-Out Author=RElliott Comment= Delete: (CRN) The field name does not use an acronym. The acronym is the functionally defined value. --- comment number 381 Page=58 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= CRN s/b COMMAND REFERENCE NUMBER (smallcaps) --- comment number 382 Page=58 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= , s/b , then --- comment number 383 Page=58 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= , s/b , then --- comment number 384 Page=58 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= zero value in the CRN field indicates s/b a COMMAND REFERENCE NUMBER field set to zero specifies --- comment number 385 Page=58 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= , s/b , then --- comment number 386 Page=58 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= , s/b , then --- comment number 387 Page=58 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= PRIORITY s/b COMMAND PRIORITY to match SAM-4 --- comment number 388 Page=58 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= PRIORITY s/b COMMAND PRIORITY to match SAM-4 --- comment number 389 Page=58 Subtype=Underline Subj=Underline Author=RElliott Comment= specifies the relative scheduling of this task in relation to other tasks already in the task setfor processing by the device server (see SAM-4). If the TASK ATTRIBUTE field contains a value other than SIMPLE, then this field is reserved. s/b specifies the relative scheduling importance of a command with the TASK ATTRIBUTE field set to 000b (i.e., SIMPLE) in relation to other commands already in the task set with SIMPLE task attributes (see SAM-4). Don't say it is Reserved; that's for SAM-4 to decide. --- comment number 390 Page=58 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Comment on Text Author=curtisb Comment= This is confusing - two descriptions with no explanation for why. Need to reference the PRIORITY field somehow to explain the reason for two or just collapse it into one. --- comment number 391 Page=59 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= QUERY UNIT ATTENTION s/b QUERY ASYNCHONOUS EVENT to match final SAM-4 --- comment number 392 Page=59 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= FCP_QUERY_UNIT_ATTENTION s/b FCP_QUERY_ASYNCHRONOUS_EVENT to match final SAM-4 --- comment number 393 Page=59 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= , s/b , then --- comment number 394 Page=59 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= , s/b , then --- comment number 395 Page=59 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= task s/b command --- comment number 396 Page=59 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= task s/b command --- comment number 397 Page=59 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Comment on Text Author=curtisb Comment= CLEAR ACA "shall not be sent" to a logical unit with a NORMACA bit equal to zero -- why not state this in terms of what the target supports instead of trying to place a requirement on the initiator? --- comment number 398 Page=60 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= QUERY UNIT ATTENTION s/b QUERY ASYNCHONOUS EVENT to match final SAM-4 --- comment number 399 Page=60 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= control field control s/b smallcaps --- comment number 400 Page=60 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= NOTE 3 There does not appear to be a NOTE 2 after NOTE 1 and before NOTE 3. --- comment number 401 Page=60 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= , s/b , then --- comment number 402 Page=60 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= , s/b , then --- comment number 403 Page=60 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= , s/b , then --- comment number 404 Page=60 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= task s/b command --- comment number 405 Page=60 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= task s/b command --- comment number 406 Page=60 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= task s/b command --- comment number 407 Page=60 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= task s/b command --- comment number 408 Page=60 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= task s/b command --- comment number 409 Page=60 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= task s/b command --- comment number 410 Page=60 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= task s/b command --- comment number 411 Page=60 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= tasks s/b commands --- comment number 412 Page=60 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= task s/b command --- comment number 413 Page=60 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= tasks s/b commands --- comment number 414 Page=60 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= task s/b command --- comment number 415 Page=60 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= task s/b command --- comment number 416 Page=60 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= task resources s/b resources --- comment number 417 Page=60 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= ab s/b an --- comment number 418 Page=60 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= automatic contingent allegiance s/b ACA condition --- comment number 419 Page=60 Subtype=StrikeOut Subj=Cross-Out Author=RElliott Comment=value of the --- comment number 420 Page=60 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= SCSI read operation s/b read operation --- comment number 421 Page=60 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= SCSI write operation s/b write operation --- comment number 422 Page=61 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= , s/b , then --- comment number 423 Page=61 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= , s/b , then --- comment number 424 Page=61 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= a read operation has the RDDATA bit set to zero or the WRDATA bit set to one s/b the command is defined as performing a read operation and the RDDATA bit is set to to zero --- comment number 425 Page=61 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= a write operation has the WRDATA bit set to zero or the RDDATA bit set to one s/b the command is defined as performing a write operation and the WRDATA bit is set to to zero --- comment number 426 Page=61 Subtype=StrikeOut Subj=Cross-Out Author=RElliott Comment= Delete: a bidirectional SCSI command has either the RDDATA bit set to zero or the WRDATA bit set to zero along with changing a) and b) as suggested. Those changes cover bidrectional commands. --- comment number 427 Page=61 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= value of zero indicates s/b field set to zero specifies --- comment number 428 Page=61 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= SCSI command s/b command --- comment number 429 Page=61 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= SCSI command s/b command --- comment number 430 Page=61 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= SCSI command s/b command --- comment number 431 Page=61 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= bidirectional SCSI command s/b bidirectional command --- comment number 432 Page=61 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= bidirectional SCSI command s/b bidirectional command --- comment number 433 Page=61 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= bidirectional SCSI command s/b bidirectional command --- comment number 434 Page=61 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= SCSI read operation and a SCSI write operation s/b read operation and a write operation --- comment number 435 Page=61 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= SCSI read operation s/b read command (since a bidirectional command also performs a read operation, but this sentence is not true) --- comment number 436 Page=61 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= SCSI write operation s/b write command (although a bidirectional command also performs a write operation and does use this definition of FCP_DL, there is a separate paragraph for bidirectional commands) --- comment number 437 Page=61 Subtype=Text Subj=Note Author=RElliott Comment= Delete "This is a bidirectional SCSI command." and add a table: rddata wrdata Description 0 0 Non-data command 0 1 Write command 1 0 Read command 1 1 Bidirectional command --- comment number 438 Page=62 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= , s/b , then --- comment number 439 Page=62 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= , s/b , then --- comment number 440 Page=62 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= when s/b if --- comment number 441 Page=62 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= RDDATA or WRDATA s/b the RDDATA bit or the WRDATA bit --- comment number 442 Page=62 Subtype=StrikeOut Subj=Cross-Out Author=RElliott Comment=the --- comment number 443 Page=62 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= value of zero indicates s/b field set to zero specifies --- comment number 444 Page=62 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= Process Login s/b Process Login (see 4.14 and 6.3) --- comment number 445 Page=62 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= category 5, the data descriptor category s/b category 5 (i.e., data descriptor) --- comment number 446 Page=62 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= SCSI command s/b command --- comment number 447 Page=62 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= bidirectional SCSI command s/b bidirectional command --- comment number 448 Page=63 Subtype=Text Subj=Note Author=RElliott Comment= Add a simple table showing the format of the FCP_DATA IU. s/b The format of the FCP_DATA IU payload is shown in table xx. Table xx - FCP_DATA IU payload 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 0 data n Also mention that: NOTE n - The FCP_DATA IU is spread across multiple Fibre Channel frames if the data is longer than the Fibre Channel frame size. --- comment number 449 Page=63 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= , s/b , then --- comment number 450 Page=63 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= , s/b , then --- comment number 451 Page=63 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= , s/b , then --- comment number 452 Page=63 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= , s/b , then --- comment number 453 Page=63 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= , s/b , then --- comment number 454 Page=63 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= , s/b , then --- comment number 455 Page=63 Subtype=StrikeOut Subj=Cross-Out Author=RElliott Comment=the --- comment number 456 Page=63 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= value of s/b value of the --- comment number 457 Page=63 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= value of s/b value of the ... field --- comment number 458 Page=63 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= value of s/b value of the ... field --- comment number 459 Page=63 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= bit is set to one in the PLRI FCP Service Parameter page s/b bit is set to one in Process Login --- comment number 460 Page=63 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= bit is set to one s/b bit is set to one in Process Login (see 4.14 and 6.3) --- comment number 461 Page=63 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= bit is set to one in the PLRI FCP Service Parameter page (see 6.3) s/b bit is set to one in Process Login --- comment number 462 Page=63 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= bit is set to zero in the PLRI FCP Service Parameter page (see 6.3) s/b bit is set to zero in Process Login --- comment number 463 Page=64 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= , s/b , then --- comment number 464 Page=64 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= , s/b , then --- comment number 465 Page=64 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= , s/b , then --- comment number 466 Page=64 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= , s/b , then --- comment number 467 Page=64 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= length FCP_DL s/b the length specified by the FCP_DL field in the FCP_CMND IU --- comment number 468 Page=64 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= after: field add: in the FCP_CMND IU --- comment number 469 Page=64 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= after: field add: in the FCP_CMND IU --- comment number 470 Page=64 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= FCP_DL s/b the FCP_DL field --- comment number 471 Page=64 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= FCP_DL s/b the length specified by the FCP_DL field --- comment number 472 Page=64 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment=the length specified by the FCP_DL field --- comment number 473 Page=64 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= SCSI command set for that command s/b SCSI command standard defining that command --- comment number 474 Page=65 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= autosense data s/b sense data --- comment number 475 Page=65 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= , s/b , then --- comment number 476 Page=65 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= , s/b , then --- comment number 477 Page=65 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= value s/b length --- comment number 478 Page=65 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment=bidirectional SCSI command --- comment number 479 Page=65 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= bidirectional SCSI command s/b bidirectional command --- comment number 480 Page=65 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= write data operation s/b write operation --- comment number 481 Page=66 Subtype=StrikeOut Subj=Cross-Out Author=RElliott Comment= Delete (Linked commands are obsolete in SAM-4): If command linking is being performed, an FCP_RSP IU is provided for each command. For linked commands, INTERMEDIATE status or INTERMEDIATE - CONDITION MET status indicates successful completion of a command with no other information valid if all other fields are zero. If command linking is requested, the use of the INTERMEDIATE or INTERMEDIATE-CONDITION MET status indicates that linking shall be performed. The LINKED COMMAND COMPLETE or LINKED COMMANDCOMPLETE (WITH FLAG) Service Response defined by SAM-4 is implicit in the presentation of INTERMEDIATE or INTERMEDIATE-CONDITION MET status in the FCP_RSP IU. --- comment number 482 Page=66 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= a target s/b the target FCP_Port --- comment number 483 Page=66 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= target s/b target FCP_Port --- comment number 484 Page=66 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= , s/b , then --- comment number 485 Page=66 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= , s/b , then --- comment number 486 Page=66 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= , s/b , then --- comment number 487 Page=66 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= In the event that s/b If --- comment number 488 Page=66 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= , s/b , then (paired with changing the beginning of the sentence to "If") --- comment number 489 Page=66 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment=What is a "SCSI device error"? --- comment number 490 Page=66 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment=What is a "SCSI device error"? --- comment number 491 Page=67 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= The content of the FCP_RSP IU is indicated in table 25. s/b The format of the FCP_RSP IU payload is shown in table 25. to match other IU introductions --- comment number 492 Page=67 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= RETRY DELAY TIMER s/b STATUS QUALIFIER to match SAM-4. Also, remove (MSB) and (LSB) since it now has substructure. --- comment number 493 Page=67 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= RETRY DELAY TIMER field contains the retry delay timer code s/b STATUS QUALIFIER field contains the status qualifier --- comment number 494 Page=67 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= , s/b , then --- comment number 495 Page=67 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= , s/b , then --- comment number 496 Page=68 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= SCSI STATUS CODE field make SCSI smallcaps --- comment number 497 Page=68 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= , s/b , then --- comment number 498 Page=68 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= , s/b , then --- comment number 499 Page=68 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= , s/b , then --- comment number 500 Page=68 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= , s/b , then --- comment number 501 Page=68 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= , s/b , then --- comment number 502 Page=68 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= , s/b , then --- comment number 503 Page=68 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= , s/b , then --- comment number 504 Page=68 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= , s/b , then --- comment number 505 Page=68 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= , s/b , then --- comment number 506 Page=69 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= , s/b , then --- comment number 507 Page=69 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= , s/b , then --- comment number 508 Page=69 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= , s/b , then --- comment number 509 Page=69 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= have s/b be set to --- comment number 510 Page=69 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= , s/b , then --- comment number 511 Page=69 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= , s/b , then --- comment number 512 Page=69 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= SCSI command s/b command --- comment number 513 Page=69 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= SCSI command s/b command --- comment number 514 Page=69 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= SCSI command s/b command --- comment number 515 Page=69 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= bidirectional SCSI commands s/b bidirectional commands --- comment number 516 Page=69 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= bidirectional SCSI commands s/b bidirectional commands --- comment number 517 Page=69 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= bidirectional SCSI commands s/b bidirectional commands --- comment number 518 Page=69 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= bidirectional SCSI commands s/b bidirectional commands --- comment number 519 Page=69 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= read operations and write operations s/b read commands and write commands --- comment number 520 Page=69 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= read operations and write operations s/b read commands and write commands --- comment number 521 Page=69 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= , s/b , then --- comment number 522 Page=69 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= , s/b , then --- comment number 523 Page=69 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= , s/b , then --- comment number 524 Page=69 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= , s/b , then --- comment number 525 Page=70 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= The number shall be 00000004h, or 00000008h. s/b This field shall be set to 00000004h or 00000008h. --- comment number 526 Page=70 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= , s/b , then --- comment number 527 Page=70 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= , s/b , then --- comment number 528 Page=70 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= , s/b , then --- comment number 529 Page=70 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= , s/b , then --- comment number 530 Page=70 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= , s/b , then --- comment number 531 Page=70 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= No FCP_SNS_INFO is provided. s/b The FCP_SNS_INFO field is not present. --- comment number 532 Page=70 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= , s/b , then --- comment number 533 Page=70 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= , s/b , then --- comment number 534 Page=70 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= , s/b , then --- comment number 535 Page=70 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= SCSI command s/b command --- comment number 536 Page=71 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= QUERY UNIT ATTENTION s/b QUERY ASYNCHONOUS EVENT to match final SAM-4 --- comment number 537 Page=71 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= , s/b , then --- comment number 538 Page=71 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= , s/b , then --- comment number 539 Page=72 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= autosense data s/b sense data --- comment number 540 Page=72 Subtype=StrikeOut Subj=Cross-Out Author=RElliott Comment=FCP devices shall perform autosense. --- comment number 541 Page=72 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= SCSI status byte of CHECK CONDITION is presented as specified by SAM-4. s/b SCSI STATUS FIELD is set to CHECK CONDITION (see SAM-4). --- comment number 542 Page=72 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= , s/b , then --- comment number 543 Page=72 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= shall be zero s/b shall be set to zero --- comment number 544 Page=72 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= when s/b if --- comment number 545 Page=73 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= service delivery subsystem s/b target FCP_Port. It doesn't directly modify the service delivery subsystem itself (that would mean modifying switch settings); by adjusting the target port behavior, though, it affects the overall behavior of the service delivery subsystem. --- comment number 546 Page=73 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= shall return CHECK CONDITION status. The sense key shall be set to ILLEGAL REQUEST and the additional sense code set to ILLEGAL FIELD IN PARAMETER LIST s/b terminate the command with CHECK CONDITION status with the sense key set to ILLEGAL REQUEST and the additional sense code set to ILLEGAL FIELD IN PARAMETER LIST --- comment number 547 Page=73 Subtype=Text Subj=Note Author=RElliott Comment= Include the Subpage code in table 28h. 02h 00h Disconnect-Reconnect mode page 18h 00h Protocol-Specific Logical Unit mode page 01h to DFh Reserved E0h to FEh Vendor specific FFh Return all subpages for this mode page code SPC-4 19h 00h Protocol-Specific Port mode page 01h to DFh Reserved E0h to FEh Vendor specific FFh Return all subpages for this mode page code SPC-4 --- comment number 548 Page=73 Subtype=StrikeOut Subj=Cross-Out Author=RElliott Comment=Control --- comment number 549 Page=73 Subtype=StrikeOut Subj=Cross-Out Author=RElliott Comment=Control --- comment number 550 Page=73 Subtype=StrikeOut Subj=Cross-Out Author=RElliott Comment= Delete: 3Fh Return all mode pages (valid only for the MODE SENSE command) SPC-4 That is covered by SPC-4 --- comment number 551 Page=73 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= , s/b , then --- comment number 552 Page=74 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Comment on Text Author=curtisb Comment= interconnect tenancy - why no section heading to allow easy browsing to this and provide an introduction to a new concept? --- comment number 553 Page=75 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= , s/b , then --- comment number 554 Page=75 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= the s/b , then the --- comment number 555 Page=76 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= , s/b , then --- comment number 556 Page=76 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= , s/b , then --- comment number 557 Page=76 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= , s/b , then --- comment number 558 Page=76 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= , s/b , then --- comment number 559 Page=76 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= , s/b , then --- comment number 560 Page=76 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= , s/b , then --- comment number 561 Page=76 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= , s/b , then --- comment number 562 Page=76 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= by the state of the PRLI ELS FCP Service Parameter page DATA OVERLAY ALLOWED bit. s/b by the DATA OVERLAY ALLOWED bit in Process Login (see 4.14 and 6.3) --- comment number 563 Page=77 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= initiator s/b application client --- comment number 564 Page=77 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= , s/b , then --- comment number 565 Page=77 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= , s/b , then --- comment number 566 Page=77 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= ENABLE PRECISE DELIVERY CHECKING s/b lowercase to match the convention used elsewhere (e.g. in 10.2.8) --- comment number 567 Page=78 Subtype=StrikeOut Subj=Cross-Out Author=RElliott Comment=shown in --- comment number 568 Page=78 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= , a target FCP_Port attached to an arbitrated loop (see FC-AL-2) shall not generate a LIP following insertion into the loop. s/b , then the target FCP_Port shall not generate a LIP following insertion into an arbitrated loop (see FC-AL-2). --- comment number 569 Page=78 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= , the target FCP_Port attached to an arbitrated loop shall generate LIP(F7,xx) after it enables a port into a loop. s/b , then the target FCP_Port shall generate LIP(F7, xx) after it enables a port into an arbitrated loop. --- comment number 570 Page=78 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= , s/b , then --- comment number 571 Page=78 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= one, a target FCP_Port attached to an arbitrated loop (see FC-AL-2) shall wait for an initiator FCP_Port to transmit the Loop Port Enable (LPE) primitive sequence before inserting itself into an arbitrated loop (see FC-AL-2). s/b one, then the target FCP_Port shall wait for an initiator FCP_Port to transmit the Loop Port Enable (LPE) primitive sequence before inserting itself into an arbitrated loop (see FC-AL-2). --- comment number 572 Page=78 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= , s/b , then --- comment number 573 Page=78 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= , s/b , then --- comment number 574 Page=78 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= one, a target FCP_Port attached to an arbitrated loop (see FC-AL-2) shall s/b one, then the target FCP_Port shall --- comment number 575 Page=78 Subtype=Text Subj=Note Author=RElliott Comment= Global: Each spelled out bit name in 10.4.x should be lowercase to match the convention used elsewhere (like 10.2.8) Example: 10.4.2 The disable target originated loop initialization (DTOLI) bit (with DTOLI in smallcaps) Suggestion: This would be more readable with the long phrase separated by parenthesis, rather than the short bit/field name. Change all the field definitions to: The DTOLI (disable target originated loop initialization) bit (with DTOLI in smallcaps) --- comment number 576 Page=79 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= tasks s/b commands --- comment number 577 Page=79 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= return CHECK CONDITION status and the sense key shall be set to ILLEGAL REQUEST and the additional sense code shall be set to INVALID FIELD IN THE PARAMETER LIST. s/b s/b terminate the command with CHECK CONDITION status with the sense key set to ILLEGAL REQUEST and the additional sense code set to ILLEGAL FIELD IN PARAMETER LIST --- comment number 578 Page=79 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= one, a target FCP_Port attached to an arbitrated loop (see FC-AL-2) shall s/b one, then the target FCP_Port shall --- comment number 579 Page=79 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= , the target FCP_Port s/b , then it --- comment number 580 Page=79 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= , s/b , then --- comment number 581 Page=79 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= , s/b , then --- comment number 582 Page=79 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= , s/b , then --- comment number 583 Page=79 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= follows s/b shall follow --- comment number 584 Page=79 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= , s/b , then --- comment number 585 Page=79 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= , a target FCP_Port attached to an arbitrated loop (see FC-AL-2) shall s/b , then the target FCP_Port shall --- comment number 586 Page=79 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= one, a target FCP_Port without a valid fabric login attached to an arbitrated loop (see FC-AL-2) shall s/b one, then the target FCP_Port shall --- comment number 587 Page=79 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= , s/b , then --- comment number 588 Page=79 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= , s/b , then --- comment number 589 Page=79 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= one, a target FCP_Port attached to an arbitrated loop (see FC-AL-2) shall s/b one, then the target FCP_Port shall --- comment number 590 Page=79 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= , s/b , then --- comment number 591 Page=79 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= one, a target FCP_Port attached by an arbitrated loop (see FC-AL-2) shall s/b one, then the target FCP_Port shall --- comment number 592 Page=79 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= tasks s/b commands --- comment number 593 Page=80 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= RR_TOVSEQ_INIT SEQ_INIT should be subscript --- comment number 594 Page=80 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= the target FCP_Port attached by an arbitrated loop s/b then the target FCP_Port --- comment number 595 Page=80 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= , s/b , then --- comment number 596 Page=80 Subtype=Text Subj=Note Author=RElliott Comment= There should be a separate section for RR_TOV UNITS, or 10.4.10 should mention both in the header --- comment number 597 Page=80 Subtype=Text Subj=Note Author=RElliott Comment= Change the left columns of table 32 to a single column RR_TOV UNITS since it is a named field: 000b 001b 011b 101b --- comment number 598 Page=81 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= Initiator | Target s/b Initiator FCP_Port | Target FCP_Port --- comment number 599 Page=81 Subtype=Text Subj=Note Author=RElliott Comment=Change to lettered table footnotes, delete "NOTES:" --- comment number 600 Page=81 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= a b c s/b a) b) c) --- comment number 601 Page=81 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= 0 s/b zero --- comment number 602 Page=81 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= 1 s/b one --- comment number 603 Page=81 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= 0 s/b zero --- comment number 604 Page=81 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= 1 s/b one --- comment number 605 Page=81 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= Add space around x and ensure that the Symbol font multiply character is used, not the letter x --- comment number 606 Page=81 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= Add space around x and ensure that the Symbol font multiply character is used, not the letter x --- comment number 607 Page=81 Subtype=StrikeOut Subj=Cross-Out Author=RElliott Comment=, --- comment number 608 Page=81 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= , s/b , then --- comment number 609 Page=82 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= specific initiator s/b initiator FCP_Port --- comment number 610 Page=82 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= , s/b , then --- comment number 611 Page=82 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= , s/b , then --- comment number 612 Page=82 Subtype=Text Subj=Note Author=RElliott Comment= Split 11.4 into two sections, one for each timer. The sentence "If either of these two...before expiration of RR_TOV" is not worded well, and is not the same as the intended rules: If Exchange Authentication is not performed within RR_TOVauth of completion of the Loop Initialization protocol, then... If the initiator FCP_Port does not send a response within RR_TOVseq_init of the transfer of Sequence Initiative, then... --- comment number 613 Page=83 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= Usage s/b lowercase --- comment number 614 Page=84 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= bidirectional SCSI commands s/b bidirectional commands --- comment number 615 Page=85 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= , s/b , then --- comment number 616 Page=85 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= sequence s/b Sequence --- comment number 617 Page=85 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= bidirectional SCSI commands s/b bidirectional commands --- comment number 618 Page=85 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= bidirectional SCSI command s/b bidirectional command --- comment number 619 Page=85 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= bidirectional SCSI command s/b bidirectional command --- comment number 620 Page=85 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= bidirectional SCSI command s/b bidirectional command --- comment number 621 Page=85 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= bidirectional SCSI command s/b bidirectional command --- comment number 622 Page=86 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= , s/b , then --- comment number 623 Page=86 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= , s/b , then --- comment number 624 Page=86 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= sequence s/b Sequence --- comment number 625 Page=86 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= tasks s/b commands --- comment number 626 Page=87 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= RX_ID field RX_ID s/b smallcaps --- comment number 627 Page=87 Subtype=StrikeOut Subj=Cross-Out Author=RElliott Comment=" --- comment number 628 Page=87 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= , s/b , then --- comment number 629 Page=87 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= , s/b , then --- comment number 630 Page=87 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= , s/b , then --- comment number 631 Page=87 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= , s/b , then --- comment number 632 Page=87 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= sequence s/b Sequence --- comment number 633 Page=87 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= SCSI task s/b command --- comment number 634 Page=88 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= reason code explanation set to s/b a Reason Code Explanation set to --- comment number 635 Page=88 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= the reason code of s/b a Reason Code set to --- comment number 636 Page=88 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= , s/b , then --- comment number 637 Page=88 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= , s/b , then --- comment number 638 Page=88 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= , s/b , then --- comment number 639 Page=88 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= , s/b , then --- comment number 640 Page=88 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= , s/b , then --- comment number 641 Page=88 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= , s/b , then --- comment number 642 Page=88 Subtype=Underline Subj=Underline Author=RElliott Comment= retransmit This sentence needs a subject. --- comment number 643 Page=88 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= , s/b , then --- comment number 644 Page=88 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= , s/b , then --- comment number 645 Page=89 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= OX_ID; s/b OX_ID field value; --- comment number 646 Page=89 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= S_ID;and s/b S_ID field value; and --- comment number 647 Page=89 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= , s/b , then --- comment number 648 Page=89 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= , s/b , then --- comment number 649 Page=89 Subtype=StrikeOut Subj=Cross-Out Author=RElliott Comment= Delete: "For non-tagged command queuing operations, the target FCP_Port shall retain the Exchange information until: a)the next FCP_CMND IU has been received for that LUN from the same initiator FCP_Port; b)an FCP_CONF IU is received for the Exchange; or c)after RR_TOVSEQ_INIT times out. For tagged command queuing operations," since SAM-4 doesn't define untagged commands any more. --- comment number 650 Page=90 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= transmit an FCP_RSP IU with CHECK CONDITION status and sense data containing a sense key of HARDWARE ERROR and an additional sense code of INITIATOR DETECTED ERROR MESSAGE RECEIVED s/b terminate the command with CHECK CONDITION status with the sense key set to HARDWARE ERROR and the additional sense code set to INITIATOR DETECTED ERROR MESSAGE RECEIVED --- comment number 651 Page=90 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= , s/b , then --- comment number 652 Page=90 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= , s/b , then --- comment number 653 Page=90 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= , s/b , then --- comment number 654 Page=90 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= with the Relative Offset parameter specified by the SRR FCP_LS request s/b with the FCP_DATA_RO field in the FCP_XFER_RDY IU set to the value of the RELATIVE OFFSET field in the SRR --- comment number 655 Page=91 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= reason code explanation set to s/b a Reason Code Explanation set to --- comment number 656 Page=91 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= the reason code of s/b a Reason Code set to --- comment number 657 Page=91 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= target devices s/b FCP target devices --- comment number 658 Page=91 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= , s/b , then --- comment number 659 Page=91 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= , s/b , then --- comment number 660 Page=91 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= , s/b , then --- comment number 661 Page=91 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= , s/b , then --- comment number 662 Page=91 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= the s/b , then the --- comment number 663 Page=91 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= , s/b , then --- comment number 664 Page=91 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= sequence s/b Sequence --- comment number 665 Page=92 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= , s/b , then --- comment number 666 Page=92 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= , s/b , then --- comment number 667 Page=92 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= , s/b , then --- comment number 668 Page=92 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= , s/b , then --- comment number 669 Page=92 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= , s/b , then --- comment number 670 Page=92 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= , s/b , then --- comment number 671 Page=92 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= , s/b , then --- comment number 672 Page=93 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= , s/b , then --- comment number 673 Page=93 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= , s/b , then --- comment number 674 Page=93 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= , s/b , then --- comment number 675 Page=94 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= retranmission s/b retransmission --- comment number 676 Page=94 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= Port_Name s/b N_Port_Name --- comment number 677 Page=94 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= Port_Name s/b N_Port_Name --- comment number 678 Page=94 Subtype=Text Subj=Note Author=RElliott Comment=Change to lettered table footnotes, delete "NOTES:" --- comment number 679 Page=94 Subtype=StrikeOut Subj=Cross-Out Author=RElliott Comment= Delete this section header A.1 Definition of procedure terms since there is no A.2 --- comment number 680 Page=94 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= tasks s/b commands and task management functions --- comment number 681 Page=94 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= tasks s/b commands --- comment number 682 Page=94 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= add: and enables the task router and task manager(s) to receive and process task management functions. --- comment number 683 Page=94 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= nexus s/b I_T_L_Q nexus --- comment number 684 Page=94 Subtype=StrikeOut Subj=Cross-Out Author=curtisb Comment= --- comment number 685 Page=94 Subtype=Caret Subj=Replacement Text Author=curtisb Comment=retranmission should be retransmission --- comment number 686 Page=94 Subtype=StrikeOut Subj=Cross-Out Author=curtisb Comment= --- comment number 687 Page=94 Subtype=Caret Subj=Replacement Text Author=curtisb Comment=retranmission should be retransmission --- comment number 688 Page=95 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= init = initiator s/b init = SCSI initiator port --- comment number 689 Page=95 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= targ = target s/b target = SCSI target port --- comment number 690 Page=95 Subtype=StrikeOut Subj=Cross-Out Author=RElliott Comment= initiator SCSI ID SAM-4 this standard DS targ or TM targ --- comment number 691 Page=95 Subtype=Text Subj=Note Author=RElliott Comment=Change to lettered table footnotes, delete "Notes" --- comment number 692 Page=95 Subtype=Text Subj=Note Author=RElliott Comment= Add status qualifier | SAM-4 | SAM-4 | DS -> targ -> init -> AC --- comment number 693 Page=95 Subtype=Text Subj=Note Author=RElliott Comment= Add command priority | SAM-4 | SAM-4/cmd | AC -> init -> targ -> DS --- comment number 694 Page=96 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= SCSI FCP read operation s/b read command (change section and table headers too) --- comment number 695 Page=97 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= SCSI command s/b command --- comment number 696 Page=97 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= SCSI FCP write operation s/b write command (change section and table headers too) --- comment number 697 Page=97 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= typical SCSI FCP operation terminating without data transfer, either because of an error or because the SCSI command does not require any data transfer, s/b non-data command or a command terminating without data transfer (change section and table headers too) --- comment number 698 Page=98 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= SCSI read operation s/b read command (change section and table headers too) --- comment number 699 Page=98 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= SCSI write operation s/b write command (change section and table headers too) --- comment number 700 Page=98 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= FCP_XFR_RDY s/b FCP_XFER_RDY --- comment number 701 Page=99 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= SCSI FCP bidirectional command s/b bidirectional command (change section and table headers too) --- comment number 702 Page=99 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= SCSI FCP bidirectional command s/b bidirectional command (change section and table headers too) --- comment number 703 Page=100 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= SCSI FCP bidirectional command s/b bidirectional command (change section and table headers too) --- comment number 704 Page=101 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= SCSI FCP bidirectional command s/b bidirectional command (change section and table headers too) --- comment number 705 Page=102 Subtype=StrikeOut Subj=Cross-Out Author=RElliott Comment= Delete this section, since linked commands are obsolete in SAM-4. B.1.11SCSI linked commands --- comment number 706 Page=103 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= SCSI Task Management function s/b task management function (change section and table headers too) --- comment number 707 Page=103 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= Task Management function s/b lowercase --- comment number 708 Page=103 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= SCSI WRITE command s/b write command (change section and table headers too) --- comment number 709 Page=104 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= an FCP write s/b a write command (change section and table headers too) --- comment number 710 Page=104 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= Xfer Seq Initiative s/b Transfer Sequence Initiative --- comment number 711 Page=104 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= Xfer Seq Initiative s/b Transfer Sequence Initiative --- comment number 712 Page=104 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= Xfer Seq Initiative s/b Transfer Sequence Initiative --- comment number 713 Page=104 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= The use of OX_ID and FQXID doesn't seem right. FQXID is defined as S_ID, D_ID, OX_ID, and RX_ID. The definition mentions that the RX_ID part starts as FFFFh, but that doesn't make it not a FQXID. The first frame has S_ID, D_ID, and OX_ID filled in. RX_ID is unused. The FCP_XFER_RDY frame fills in RX_ID as well. This might be better shown using variables. In the first frame, show: S_ID=A D_ID=B OX_ID=C RX_ID=FFFFh Then show this in the FCP_XFER_RDY frame and FCP_RSP frame: S_ID=B, D_ID=A, OX_ID=C, RX_ID=D. Make similar changes in figures B.2 and B.3. --- comment number 714 Page=104 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= Initiator Frames Target Frames s/b FCP initiator port frames FCP target port frames --- comment number 715 Page=104 Subtype=Text Subj=Note Author=RElliott Comment= Add "class 2" to the section header and paragraph introducing the figure. --- comment number 716 Page=104 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= SOFi2, EOFn, and EOFt have not been defined in this standard. Add a key: list at the bottom of each figure using them. --- comment number 717 Page=105 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= frameframe s/b frame --- comment number 718 Page=105 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= Xfer Seq Initiative s/b Transfer Sequence Initiative --- comment number 719 Page=105 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= Hold Seq Initiative s/b Hold Sequence Initiative --- comment number 720 Page=105 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= Hold Seq Initiative s/b Hold Sequence Initiative --- comment number 721 Page=105 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= Initiator Frames Target Frames s/b FCP initiator port frames FCP target port frames --- comment number 722 Page=106 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= an FCP read s/b a read command (change section and table headers too) --- comment number 723 Page=106 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= Xfer Seq Initiative s/b Transfer Sequence Initiative --- comment number 724 Page=106 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= Xfer Seq Initiative s/b Transfer Sequence Initiative --- comment number 725 Page=106 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= Initiator Frames Target Frames s/b FCP initiator port frames FCP target port frames --- comment number 726 Page=106 Subtype=Text Subj=Note Author=RElliott Comment= Add "class 2" to the section header and paragraph introducing the figure. --- comment number 727 Page=107 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= Hold Seq Initiative s/b Hold Sequence Initiative --- comment number 728 Page=107 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= Hold Seq Initiative s/b Hold Sequence Initiative --- comment number 729 Page=107 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= Hold Seq Initiative s/b Hold Sequence Initiative --- comment number 730 Page=107 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= FCP Initiator Frames FCP Target Frames s/b FCP initiator port frames FCP target port frames --- comment number 731 Page=109 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= ABTS (Sequence) s/bABTS --- comment number 732 Page=109 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= In all annex C figures: Initiator Target s/b Initiator FCP_Port Target FCP_Port --- comment number 733 Page=111 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= REC ElS s/b REC ELS --- comment number 734 Page=111 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= ABTS (Sequence) s/b ABTS --- comment number 735 Page=111 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= ABTS (Sequence) s/b ABTS --- comment number 736 Page=112 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= ABTS (Sequence) s/b ABTS --- comment number 737 Page=113 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= REC_TOV* s/b REC_TOV --- comment number 738 Page=113 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= REC_TOV* s/b REC_TOV --- comment number 739 Page=113 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= REC_TOV* s/b REC_TOV --- comment number 740 Page=113 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= (RO=0) s/b (FCP_DATA_RO=0) --- comment number 741 Page=113 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= (RO=0) s/b (FCP_DATA_RO=0) --- comment number 742 Page=114 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= ABTS (Sequence) s/b ABTS --- comment number 743 Page=114 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= (RO=0) s/b (FCP_DATA_RO=0) --- comment number 744 Page=114 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= (RO=0) s/b (FCP_DATA_RO=0) --- comment number 745 Page=115 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= ABTS (Sequence) s/b ABTS --- comment number 746 Page=115 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= (RO=0) s/b (FCP_DATA_RO=0) --- comment number 747 Page=116 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= RR_TOVSEQ_INI s/b RR_TOVSEQ_INIT --- comment number 748 Page=116 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= REC_TOV* s/b REC_TOV --- comment number 749 Page=116 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= REC_TOV* s/b REC_TOV --- comment number 750 Page=117 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= ABTS (Sequence) s/b ABTS --- comment number 751 Page=118 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= ABTS (Sequence) s/b ABTS --- comment number 752 Page=119 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= reason code of s/b Reason Code set to --- comment number 753 Page=119 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= the reason code explanation of s/b Reason Code Explanation set to --- comment number 754 Page=119 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= ABTS (Sequence) s/b ABTS --- comment number 755 Page=120 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= Invalid OX_ID - RX_ID s/b Invalid OX_ID - RX_ID combination --- comment number 756 Page=120 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= ABTS (Sequence) s/b ABTS --- comment number 757 Page=120 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= ABTS (Sequence) s/b ABTS --- comment number 758 Page=120 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= ABTS (Sequence) s/b ABTS --- comment number 759 Page=121 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= (seq=1, cnt=0, RO=0) s/b SEQ_ID=1, SEQ_CNT=0, PARAMETER=0 --- comment number 760 Page=121 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= seq=1, cnt=1 s/b SEQ_ID=1, SEQ_CNT=1 --- comment number 761 Page=121 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= (seq=2, cnt=0, RO=0) s/b (SEQ_ID=2, SEQ_CNT=0, PARAMETER=0) --- comment number 762 Page=121 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= (seq=2, cnt=1) s/b (SEQ_ID=2, SEQ_CNT=1) --- comment number 763 Page=121 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= (RO=0) s/b (FCP_DATA_RO=0) --- comment number 764 Page=121 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= (RO=0) s/b (FCP_DATA_RO=0) --- comment number 765 Page=121 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= (RO=0) s/b (RELATIVE OFFSET=0) --- comment number 766 Page=122 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= ABTS (Sequence) s/b ABTS --- comment number 767 Page=122 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= (seq=1, cnt=0, RO=0) s/b (SEQ_ID=1, SEQ_CNT=0, PARAMETER=0) --- comment number 768 Page=122 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= (seq=1, cnt=1) s/b (SEQ_ID=1, SEQ_CNT=1) --- comment number 769 Page=122 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= (seq=2, cnt=0, RO=0) s/b (SEQ_ID=2, SEQ_CNT=0, PARAMETER=0) --- comment number 770 Page=122 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= (seq=2, cnt=1) s/b (SEQ_ID=2, SEQ_CNT=1) --- comment number 771 Page=122 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= (RO=0) s/b (FCP_DATA_RO=0) --- comment number 772 Page=122 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= (RO=0) s/b (FCP_DATA_RO=0) and add a space before ( --- comment number 773 Page=122 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= (RO=0) s/b (RELATIVE OFFSET=0) --- comment number 774 Page=123 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= (seq=1, cnt=0, RO=0) s/b (SEQ_ID=1, SEQ_CNT=0, PARAMETER=0) --- comment number 775 Page=123 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= (seq=1, cnt=1) s/b (SEQ_ID=1, SEQ_CNT=1) --- comment number 776 Page=123 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= (seq=2, cnt=0, RO=0) s/b (SEQ_ID=2, SEQ_CNT=0, PARAMETER=0) --- comment number 777 Page=123 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= (seq=2, cnt=1) s/b (SEQ_ID=2, SEQ_CNT=1) --- comment number 778 Page=123 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= (RO=0) s/b (FCP_DATA_RO=0) --- comment number 779 Page=123 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= (RO=0) s/b (FCP_DATA_RO=0) --- comment number 780 Page=123 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= (RO=0) s/b (RELATIVE OFFSET=0) --- comment number 781 Page=124 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= ABTS (Sequence) s/b ABTS --- comment number 782 Page=124 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= (seq=1, cnt=0, RO=0) s/b (SEQ_ID=1, SEQ_CNT=0, PARAMETER=0) --- comment number 783 Page=124 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= (seq=1, cnt=1) s/b (SEQ_ID=1, SEQ_CNT=1) --- comment number 784 Page=124 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= (seq=2, cnt=0, RO=0) s/b (SEQ_ID=2, SEQ_CNT=0, PARAMETER=0) --- comment number 785 Page=124 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= (seq=2, cnt=1) s/b (SEQ_ID=2, SEQ_CNT=1) --- comment number 786 Page=124 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= (RO=0) s/b (FCP_DATA_RO=0) --- comment number 787 Page=124 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= (RO=0) s/b (FCP_DATA_RO=0) and add a space before ( --- comment number 788 Page=124 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= (RO=0) s/b (RELATIVE OFFSET=0) --- comment number 789 Page=125 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= REC_TOV* s/b REC_TOV --- comment number 790 Page=125 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= REC_TOV* s/b REC_TOV --- comment number 791 Page=125 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= (seq=1, cnt=0, RO=0) s/b (SEQ_ID=1, SEQ_CNT=0, PARAMETER=0) --- comment number 792 Page=125 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= (seq=1, cnt=1) s/b (SEQ_ID=1, SEQ_CNT=1) --- comment number 793 Page=125 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= (seq=2, cnt=0, RO=0) s/b (SEQ_ID=2, SEQ_CNT=0, PARAMETER=0) --- comment number 794 Page=125 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= (seq=2, cnt=1) s/b (SEQ_ID=2, SEQ_CNT=1) --- comment number 795 Page=125 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= (RO=0) s/b (RELATIVE OFFSET=0) --- comment number 796 Page=125 Subtype=StrikeOut Subj=Cross-Out Author=curtisb Comment= --- comment number 797 Page=125 Subtype=Caret Subj=Replacement Text Author=curtisb Comment= FCP_DATA retransmission uses a new --- comment number 798 Page=126 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= ABTS (Sequence) s/b ABTS --- comment number 799 Page=126 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= (seq=1, cnt=0, RO=0) s/b (SEQ_ID=1, SEQ_CNT=0, PARAMETER=0) --- comment number 800 Page=126 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= (seq=1, cnt=1) s/b (SEQ_ID=1, SEQ_CNT=1) --- comment number 801 Page=126 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= (seq=2, cnt=0, RO=0) s/b (SEQ_ID=2, SEQ_CNT=0, PARAMETER=0) --- comment number 802 Page=126 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= (seq=2, cnt=1) s/b (SEQ_ID=2, SEQ_CNT=1) --- comment number 803 Page=126 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= (RO=0) s/b (RELATIVE OFFSET=0) --- comment number 804 Page=127 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= REC_TOV* s/b REC_TOV --- comment number 805 Page=127 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= REC_TOV* s/b REC_TOV --- comment number 806 Page=127 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= is add space before --- comment number 807 Page=127 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= (seq=1, cnt=0, RO=0) s/b (SEQ_ID=1, SEQ_CNT=0, PARAMETER=0) --- comment number 808 Page=127 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= (seq=1, cnt=1) s/b (SEQ_ID=1, SEQ_CNT=1) --- comment number 809 Page=127 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= (seq=2, cnt=0, RO=0) s/b (SEQ_ID=2, SEQ_CNT=0, PARAMETER=0) --- comment number 810 Page=127 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= (seq=2, cnt=1) s/b (SEQ_ID=2, SEQ_CNT=1) --- comment number 811 Page=127 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= (RO=0) s/b (RELATIVE OFFSET=0) --- comment number 812 Page=127 Subtype=StrikeOut Subj=Cross-Out Author=curtisb Comment= --- comment number 813 Page=127 Subtype=Caret Subj=Replacement Text Author=curtisb Comment= FCP_DATA retransmission uses a new -- again something seems left off - probably "Exchange." --- comment number 814 Page=128 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= sequence s/b Sequence --- comment number 815 Page=128 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= Error s/b error --- comment number 816 Page=128 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= ABTS (Sequence) s/b ABTS --- comment number 817 Page=128 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= (seq=1, cnt=0, RO=0) s/b (SEQ_ID=1, SEQ_CNT=0, PARAMETER=0) --- comment number 818 Page=128 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= (seq=1, cnt=1) s/b (SEQ_ID=1, SEQ_CNT=1) --- comment number 819 Page=128 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= (seq=2, cnt=0, RO=0) s/b (SEQ_ID=2, SEQ_CNT=0, PARAMETER=0) --- comment number 820 Page=128 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= (seq=2, cnt=1) s/b (SEQ_ID=2, SEQ_CNT=1) --- comment number 821 Page=128 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= (RO=0) s/b (RELATIVE OFFSET=0) --- comment number 822 Page=129 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= ABTS (Sequence) s/b ABTS --- comment number 823 Page=129 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= (seq=1, cnt=0, RO=0) s/b (SEQ_ID=1, SEQ_CNT=0, PARAMETER=0) --- comment number 824 Page=130 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= ABTS (Sequence) s/b the ABTS --- comment number 825 Page=130 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= ABTS (Sequence) s/b ABTS --- comment number 826 Page=130 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= (seq=1, cnt=0, RO=0) s/b (SEQ_ID=1, SEQ_CNT=0, PARAMETER=0) --- comment number 827 Page=130 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= (seq=1, cnt=1) s/b (SEQ_ID=1, SEQ_CNT=1) --- comment number 828 Page=130 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= (RO=0) s/b (FCP_DATA_RO=0) --- comment number 829 Page=132 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= ABTS (Sequence) s/b ABTS --- comment number 830 Page=133 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= Invalid OX_ID-RX_ID s/b Invalid OX_ID-RX_ID combination --- comment number 831 Page=133 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= ABTS (Sequence) s/b ABTS --- comment number 832 Page=134 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= 2xR_A_TOV Add space around x and ensure that the Symbol font multiply character is used, not the letter x --- comment number 833 Page=134 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= ABTS (Sequence) s/b ABTS --- comment number 834 Page=134 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= ABTS (Sequence) s/b ABTS --- comment number 835 Page=135 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= ABTS (Sequence) s/b ABTS --- comment number 836 Page=135 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= ABTS (Sequence) s/b ABTS --- comment number 837 Page=137 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= Lost, Unacknowledged Classes, Abort s/b lowercase --- comment number 838 Page=137 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= 2xR_A_TOV Add space around x and ensure that the Symbol font multiply character is used, not the letter x --- comment number 839 Page=137 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= 2xR_A_TOV Add space around x and ensure that the Symbol font multiply character is used, not the letter x --- comment number 840 Page=137 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= ABTS (Sequence) s/b ABTS --- comment number 841 Page=137 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= ABTS (Sequence) s/b ABTS --- comment number 842 Page=138 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= 2 times R_A_TOV s/b 2 x R_A_TOV using the Symbol font times character --- comment number 843 Page=138 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= ABTS (Sequence) s/b ABTS --- comment number 844 Page=138 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= ABTS (Sequence) s/b ABTS --- comment number 845 Page=138 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= ABTS (Sequence) s/b ABTS --- comment number 846 Page=138 Subtype=StrikeOut Subj=Cross-Out Author=curtisb Comment= --- comment number 847 Page=138 Subtype=Caret Subj=Replacement Text Author=curtisb Comment= Seqeunce should be Sequence --- comment number 848 Page=139 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= 2 times R_A_TOV s/b 2 x R_A_TOV using the Symbol font times character --- comment number 849 Page=139 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= ABTS (Sequence) s/b ABTS --- comment number 850 Page=139 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= ABTS (Sequence) s/b ABTS --- comment number 851 Page=140 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= ABTS (Sequence) s/b ABTS --- comment number 852 Page=140 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= ABTS (Sequence) s/b ABTS --- comment number 853 Page=140 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= ABTS (Sequence) s/b ABTS --- comment number 854 Page=141 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= ABTS (Sequence) s/b ABTS --- comment number 855 Page=141 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= ABTS (Sequence) s/b ABTS --- comment number 856 Page=141 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= ABTS (Sequence) s/b ABTS --- comment number 857 Page=142 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= FCP target function s/b FCP target port function --- comment number 858 Page=142 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= type of target s/b peripheral device type of the logical unit --- comment number 859 Page=142 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= Port_Name s/b N_Port_Name --- comment number 860 Page=142 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= PAGE CODE s/b PAGE CODE field --- comment number 861 Page=142 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= the s/b each --- comment number 862 Page=143 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= Address Identifier s/b lowercase --- comment number 863 Page=143 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= Address Identifier s/b lowercase --- comment number 864 Page=143 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= the s/b each --- comment number 865 Page=143 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= PAGE CODE s/b PAGE CODE field --- comment number 866 Page=143 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= the Device Identification VPD page s/b 83h (i.e., the Device Identification VPD page) --- comment number 867 Page=143 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= PAGE CODE s/b PAGE CODE field --- comment number 868 Page=143 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= the Device Identification VPD page s/b set to 83h (i.e., the Device Identification VPD page) --- comment number 869 Page=144 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= task s/b command --- comment number 870 Page=146 Subtype=Highlight Subj=Highlight Author=RElliott Comment= Excahnge s/b Exchange --- comment number 871 Page=146 Subtype=StrikeOut Subj=Cross-Out Author=RElliott Comment= Delete this section header E.3.1 RRQ ELS request format since there is no E.3.2 ************************************************************** Comments attached to No ballot from Kevin Butt of IBM Corp.: Identical comments uploaded in xls format as T10/08-413 BrianHart-001 (T) Page: 85 (69 hardcopy) Location: 12.2.2 first paragraph, item b) Problem Description: Target requirement for FCP_RESID_UNDER is missing:: There is no requirement for a target to set FCP_RESID_UNDER if a read operation results in the transfer of fewer than FCP_DL bytes. The 4th paragraph of section 9.4.2, requires: "Because there were fewer bytes provided than required by FCP_DL, the FCP_RESID_UNDER bit...shall be set to one in the FCP_RSP IU...." But this occurs in the context of a discussion of a write operation. There is no similar requirement that FCP_RESID_UNDER be set appropriately in the context of read operations. Section 12.2.2 first paragraph bullet (b) requires the initiator to detect underrun. This may imply a requirement for the target, but it would be better explicitly stated. Suggested Solution: 1) Break section 9.4 paragraph 4 after "...the target FCP_Port shall discard the excess bytes.", -and- 2) Amend the following sentence to replace "Because there were fewer bytes provided than required...." with "If an operation results in the transfer of fewer bytes than required....". BrianHart-002 (T) Page: 43 (27 hardcopy) Location: 6.3.4 Problem Description: Sequence level recovery is not defined:: Every usage of the phrase "Sequence level recovery" has the indicated capitalization. This is a marked usage and suggests that the phrase is being used as a term of art. However, the phrase is not defined by the standard, so is left to assume its normal English meaning. It is not clear how the normal meaning of the phrase relates to the concepts of the standard. Specifically, it is not clear when an FCP_Port "ha[s] agreed to Sequence level recovery". What constitutes this agreement should be clearly defined as it qualifies several sections describing recovery. This has ramifications for data integrity (see, e.g., issue (4) below). Suggested Solution: In section 6.3.4, subsection "Word 3, Bit 8: RETRY", add a sentence following the first sentence of the third paragraph: "....in both the request payload and in the accept payload. In this case the initiator and target shall have agreed to Sequence level recovery." BrianHart-003 (T) Page: 89 (73 hardcopy) Location: 12.4.1.5 Problem Description: Recovery is insufficiently required:: Several recovery sections (e.g. 12.4.1.5) are qualified by: "This procedure shall be used only by FCP devices that have agreed to Sequence level recovery". That is, agreement to Sequence level recovery is necessary but not sufficient to imply that an initiator or target will perform the defined recovery. The standard provides no mechanism for an agreeable FCP_Port to communicate its actual intent to follow the recovery procedures, so it is possible that an initiator and target might make opposite choices. There are cases, though, where either both or neither initiator and target must perform the recovery in order to preserve data integrity. A target, for example, might agree to Sequence level recovery but elect not to perform the FCP_RSP IU recovery described in section 12.4.1.5. Not being subject, then, to the restrictions in 12.4.1.5, the target would be at liberty to discard exchange information as soon as an FCP_RSP was sent. If the FCP_RSP were lost, an otherwise timely REC by the initiator would be rejected by the target with "Logical error"/ Invalid OX_ID-RX_ID combination". The initiator could then resend the FCP_CMND (per 12.4.1.3) to the detriment of data integrity. (The target would have performed the operation twice but the initiator would believe that it had only been performed once.) Suggested Solution: Replace the qualifications at the heads of sections 12.4.1.3, 12.4.1.4, 12.4.1.5, 12.4.1.6, and 12.4.1.7 with: "This procedure shall be used by and only by FCP devices that have agreed to Sequence level recovery." Note the larger effect on 12.4.1.3 than on the others. BrianHart-004 (T) Page: 82 (66 hardcopy) Location: 11.3 Problem Description: R_A_TOV (re)definitions drop vital guarantee:: Section 11.3 states: "R_A_TOV has two separate components, labeled R_A_TOVseq_qual and R_A_TOVels." FC-FS-2 contains no mention of separate components of R_A_TOV. It's unclear whether FCP's R_A_TOV component timers inherit substance or merely name from FC-FS-2. FC-FS-2 section 20.2.1.4 provides a guarantee: "R_A_TOV represents E_D_TOV plus twice the maximum time that a frame may be delayed within a Fabric and still be delivered." The notion that R_A_TOV encompasses the maximum fabric delivery time is vital to the definition of RR_TOVseq_init (Table 30) and the recovery mechanisms that depend on it (e.g. section 12.4.1.5). If R_A_TOVels does not inherit substantially from FC-FS-2 R_A_TOV then this vital guarantee is dropped. Even if R_A_TOVels does inherit substantially from FC-FS-2 R_A_TOV, Table 30 flatly redefines the duration of R_A_TOVels as 2 or 10 seconds without mention of maximum fabric delivery time, dropping the vital guarantee. Suggested Solution: Amend Table 30 - Timer summary NOTE 1 to add a sentence: "R_A_TOV for ELS shall encompass the maximum time that a frame may be delayed within a Fabric and still be delivered." Note that boundedness of R_A_TOVels directly affects boundedness of RR_TOVseq_init, and so has implications for boundedness of REC_TOV. BrianHart-005 (T) Page: 88 (72 hardcopy) Location: 12.4.1.3 Problem Description: REC_TOV floor allows REC vs FCP_CMND race:: Section 12.4.1.3 equates REC reject (with "Logical error"/"Invalid OX_ID-RX_ID combination") to the loss of the FCP_CMND and prescribes retransmission of the FCP_CMND. But an initiator would see the same reject in the case where the REC merely arrived at the target ahead of the FCP_CMND. In that case retransmission of the FCP_CMND could result in a loss of data integrity. Arrival of REC ahead of FCP_CMND could be prevented by ensuring that REC is not transmitted until it is certain that the FCP_CMND is either delivered or lost. FC-FS-2 section 20.2.1.3 limits to three the actions whose duration is bounded by E_D_TOV; frame delivery across a fabric is not among those. Rather, FC-FS-2 section 20.2.1.4 describes R_A_TOV as the timer that encompasses the maximum frame delivery time. In order to ensure REC is not sent prematurely, REC_TOV's range must therefore encompass R_A_TOV rather than E_D_TOV. Suggested Solution: Replace REC_TOV range of ">= E_D_TOV + 1s" with ">= R_A_TOV" in Table 30 - Timer summary. -or- Replace section 12.4.1.3 paragaph 2 with: 'If the target reports the exchange invalid (i.e. the initiator FCP_Port receives an LS_RJT for the REC with the reason code of "Logical error" and reason code explanation set to "Invalid OX_ID-RX_ID combination"), the initiator shall not retransmit the FCP_CMND and shall notify the application client appropriately.' Note that if 12.4.1.3 is allowed to stand a modification may still be in order. Verb "retransmit" following the parenthetical is in the imperative mood and would better be declarative: "...), the initiator shall retransmit...." BrianHart-006 (T) Page: 81 (65 hardcopy) Location: Table 33 Problem Description: Lack of REC_TOV ceiling allows REC vs exchange discard race:: REC_TOV is described in the timer summary table (Table 33) as a range with a floor but no ceiling. No mechanism is provided to communicate the choice of REC_TOV between initiator and target. This allows the possibility that an initiator may choose a REC_TOV that is arbitrarily large and that differs from the REC_TOV chosen by the target. Further, section 11.5 describes REC_TOV as the "minimum polling interval" for REC and states that a duration of "at least" REC_TOV occurs before REC may be sent. REC_TOV is not a ceiling on the REC polling interval. Section 12.4.1.5 attempts to ensure that a target will maintain exchange information until a timely REC arrives by requiring that the target retain the information for up to RR_TOVseq_init after sending the FCP_RSP. Table 30 suggests RR_TOVseq_init should be ">= REC_TOV + 2xR_A_TOVels + 1s" (in the RETRY case), but this is insufficient. The target must necessarily base its RR_TOVseq_init on its own REC_TOV since it has no knowledge of the initiator's REC_TOV. The initiator's REC_TOV can be arbitrarily larger than the target's, so the target can be left with an RR_TOVseq_init that does not encompass the initiator's REC_TOV. Even when the initiator and target have sufficiently similar REC_TOV, the initiator may delay arbitrarily beyond REC_TOV before transmiting the REC, leaving the target with an RR_TOVseq_init that does not encompass the initiator's REC polling interval. If the initiator sends REC after the target's RR_TOVseq_init expires (or merely late enough in the RR_TOVseq_init interval), the REC will (may) arrive after RR_TOVseq_init has expired. The target, then, may have discarded the exchange information in accordance with 12.4.1.5 and will reject the REC with "Logical error"/"Invalid OX_ID-RX_ID combination". The initiator may respond by resending the FCP_CMND (per 12.4.1.3) to the detriment of data integrity. The initiator's REC polling interval must be constrained to ensure the REC arrives at the target before the expiration of RR_TOVseq_init. This requires a ceiling on REC polling (and so also on REC_TOV) and an effective floor on RR_TOVseq_init. Suggested Solution: All three of: 1) Modify section 11.5 first paragraph to add a sentence encouraging prompt polling by initiators: "....first polling for Exchange status with the REC ELS. Initiators should transmit REC promptly after REC_TOV expiration. Table 31...." -and- 2) Modify Table 30 to set an appropriate ceiling for REC_TOV, perhaps one of: "<= R_A_TOV", "<= R_A_TOV + E_D_TOV", or "<= 2xR_A_TOV". -and- 3) Modify Table 30 to set a floor for RR_TOVseq_init based on the REC_TOV ceiling, making RR_TOVseq_init's range: ">= ceil(REC_TOV) + R_A_TOV + 1s" (with "R_A_TOV" allowing time for the REC to traverse the fabric and "1s" as an allowance for initiator promptness failings). -- Or just: -- Replace section 12.4.1.3 paragaph 2 with: 'If the target reports the exchange invalid (i.e. the initiator FCP_Port receives an LS_RJT for the REC with the reason code of "Logical error" and reason code explanation set to "Invalid OX_ID-RX_ID combination"), the initiator shall not retransmit the FCP_CMND and shall notify the application client of the problem.' Note that if 12.4.1.3 is allowed to stand a modification may still be in order. Verb "retransmit" following the parenthetical is in the imperative mood and would better be declarative: "...), the initiator shall retransmit...." BrianHart-007 (T) Page: Location: Problem Description: The target must retain the exchange information not only long enough to ensure that any REC from the initiator will have arrived before discard, but additionally long enough to allow time for the target to transmit the REC ACCEPT, the ACCEPT to cross the fabric and reach the initiator, the initiator to process the ACCEPT and respond with SRR, and the SRR to cross the fabric to arrive again at the target. Practically, I think that means the target must retain the exchange information for an additional "2 x R_A_TOV + 1s" (two fabric traversals and some grace for promptness of target and initiator) _beyond_ what I had considered originally. Suggested Solution: KevinButt-001 (T) Page: Location: 12.4.2.3 & 4.7 - General comment Problem Description: There needs to be a shall statement prohibiting consecutive exchanges with the same OX_ID as well as making the clear statement that "rapid" (whatever that means) reuse of OX_ID is highly frowned upon. If a shall statement cannot be made, then a statement is needed that clearly acknowledges that rapid OX_ID reuse is dangerous behavior. It seems like rapid OX_ID reuse would create a colossal mess if command queuing were enabled. Suggested Solution: ************************************************************** Comments attached to Abs ballot from Mark Seidel of Intel Corp.: The work of our organization is not materially affected by the subject matter of this standard. ************************************************************** Comments attached to Abs ballot from John Geldman of Lexar Media, Inc.: T11 is not currently pertinent to our business. ************************************************************** Comments attached to No ballot from John Lohmeyer of LSI Corp.: LSI comment number 1 -- by George Penokie Page ii (PDF 2), 7.9 inches from the top, 0.7 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Abstract The abstract is not correct as it says nothing about this version of FCP. I would suggest that putting version information is not a good idea and that the abstract should be rewritten to be more abstract. LSI comment number 2 -- by George Penokie Page ii (PDF 2), 8.5 inches from the top, 2.7 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - The PATENT STATEMENT should be forced to start at the top of the page. LSI comment number 3 -- by George Penokie Page v (PDF 5), 1.3 inches from the top, 0.9 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - The Change History needs to be deleted in the version that goes to public review. LSI comment number 4 -- by George Penokie Page 1 (PDF 17), 7.3 inches from the top, 1.4 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - There is no reference to SAM-3 in this standard so this << ANSI/INCITS 402-2005, SCSI Architecture Model - 3 (SAM-3) >> should be deleted. LSI comment number 5 -- by George Penokie Page 2 (PDF 18), 4.6 inches from the top, 0.7 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - This << Class 4) See >> needs a period << Class 4). See >> LSI comment number 6 -- by George Penokie Page 3 (PDF 19), 9.0 inches from the top, 2.8 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - This << An encoded 64-bit identifier for a logical unit. >> should be changed to << An identifier for a logical unit. >> LSI comment number 7 -- by George Penokie Page 3 (PDF 19), 1.4 inches from the top, 2.0 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - This << The term used in FC-FS-3 to describe removing >> should be << Removing >> as the reset is redundant with the << See FC-FS-3 >> statement. LSI comment number 8 -- by George Penokie Page 3 (PDF 19), 5.4 inches from the top, 0.9 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - This << performs the operations described in >> should be << performs I_T nexus loss operations described in >> LSI comment number 9 -- by George Penokie Page 3 (PDF 19), 6.9 inches from the top, 0.7 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - You have a definition for the term << initiator >> but there is no corresponding definition for the term << target >>. One solution would be to delete this term as it is only used about 10 time and change all the usages to something more specific like SCSI initiator device which would also have to be defined but at least you would be in line with SAM-4 that way. In either case you have add in the corresponding target definition. LSI comment number 10 -- by George Penokie Page 3 (PDF 19), 7.4 inches from the top, 0.9 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - You need to set frame so it will not split a hyphen across lines. LSI comment number 11 -- by George Penokie Page 3 (PDF 19), 7.9 inches from the top, 0.9 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - There is no such thing as a SCSI target/initiator port in SAM-4 so this << or of a SCSI target/initiator port when operating as a SCSI initiator port >> needs to be deleted. LSI comment number 12 -- by George Penokie Page 3 (PDF 19), 8.1 inches from the top, 4.6 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - There is no definition of a << FCP device >>. One needs to be added to the list of definitions. LSI comment number 13 -- by George Penokie Page 3 (PDF 19), 8.8 inches from the top, 0.9 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - This << A SCSI target device object, containing a device server and task manager, that implements a device model and manages tasks to process commands sent by an application client. See SAM-4. >> should be changed to << An externally addressable entity within a SCSI target device that implements a SCSI device model and contains a device server. See SAM-4. >> LSI comment number 14 -- by George Penokie Page 3 (PDF 19), 9.9 inches from the top, 4.1 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - This << in Fibre Channel such as N_Port, Node, F_Port, or Fabric. >> should either be change to << in Fibre Channel (i.e., N_Port, Node, F_Port, or Fabric). >> or << in Fibre Channel (e.g., N_Port, Node, F_Port, or Fabric). >> depending on if it is an complete list or a list of examples. The << such as >> implies it is a complete list. LSI comment number 15 -- by George Penokie Page 4 (PDF 20), 2.8 inches from the top, 4.7 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - This << FC-2 layer. It may act as an >> should be << FC-2 layer that may act as an >> LSI comment number 16 -- by George Penokie Page 4 (PDF 20), 9.2 inches from the top, 2.1 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - This << A device that originates or services SCSI commands.>> should be << A device that contains one or more SCSI ports that are connected to a service delivery subsystem and supports a SCSI application protocol. >> LSI comment number 17 -- by George Penokie Page 4 (PDF 20), 9.5 inches from the top, 5.1 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - There are no more linked command in SAM-4 so this << a series of linked SCSI commands, >> needs to be deleted. LSI comment number 18 -- by George Penokie Page 5 (PDF 21), 1.5 inches from the top, 0.9 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - There is no such thing as a SCSI target/initiator port in SAM-4 so this <> needs to be deleted. . LSI comment number 19 -- by George Penokie Page 5 (PDF 21), 4.2 inches from the top, 0.9 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - There is no such thing as a SCSI target/initiator port in SAM-4 so this << or of a SCSI target/initiator port when operating as a SCSI target port >> needs to be deleted. LSI comment number 20 -- by George Penokie Page 5 (PDF 21), 9.2 inches from the top, 0.8 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Remove all the periods from the abbreviations descriptions. LSI comment number 21 -- by George Penokie Page 6 (PDF 22), 6.5 inches from the top, 4.2 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - LUN needs to be added to the acronyms list. LSI comment number 22 -- by George Penokie Page 7 (PDF 23), 2.4 inches from the top, 0.9 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - This is not a keyword and should be deleted << 3.3.1expected: A keyword used to describe the behavior of the hardware or software in the design models assumed by this standard. Other hardware and software design models may also be implemented. >> LSI comment number 23 -- by George Penokie Page 7 (PDF 23), 8.3 inches from the top, 0.9 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - This << alternative; equivalent to the phrase it is strongly recommendedŽ. >> should be << alternative (equivalent to it is strongly recommendedŽ). >> LSI comment number 24 -- by George Penokie Page 8 (PDF 24), 3.3 inches from the top, 0.5 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - This is not an accurate description of the conventions. I recommend you copy section 3.4 from SAS-2 here. LSI comment number 25 -- by George Penokie Page 9 (PDF 25), 2.6 inches from the top, 0.9 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Give me a break, this sentence is just too much << The FC-2 layer may be treated as a very powerful delivery service with information grouping and several defined classes of service. >> it should be << The FC-2 layer is a delivery service with information grouping and several defined classes of service. >> LSI comment number 26 -- by George Penokie Page 10 (PDF 26), 5.2 inches from the top, 0.7 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - You need to set frame so it will not split a hyphen across lines. LSI comment number 27 -- by George Penokie Page 10 (PDF 26), 6.4 inches from the top, 0.7 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Linked command are no longer defined so this << or a list of linked requests >> should be deleted. LSI comment number 28 -- by George Penokie Page 11 (PDF 27), 6.3 inches from the top, 6.4 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - There is no more linking so << no command linking >> this should be deleted. LSI comment number 29 -- by George Penokie Page 11 (PDF 27), 6.9 inches from the top, 0.9 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - There is not linking so this << sequence of the Exchange. The device server determines whether additional linked commands are to be performed in the FCP I/O operation. If this is the last or only command processed in the FCP I/O operation, the FCP I/O operation and the >> should be << sequence of the Exchange, then the FCP I/O operation and the >> LSI comment number 30 -- by George Penokie Page 11 (PDF 27), 9.9 inches from the top, 0.9 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - No linking so delete << If the command is linked to another command, the FCP_RSP IU payload shall contain the proper status (i.e., INTERMEDIATE or INTERMEDIATE-CONDITION MET) indicating that another command shall be processed.The target FCP_Port shall present the FCP_RSP using the IU that allows command linking, I5 (see 9.1). The initiator FCP_Port shall continue the same Exchange with an FCP_CMND IU, beginning the next SCSI >> LSI comment number 31 -- by George Penokie Page 12 (PDF 28), 1.7 inches from the top, 0.7 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - No linking so delete << command. All SCSI commands linked in the FCP I/O operation except the last are processed in the manner described above. SAM-4 defines the cases that interrupt and terminate a series of linked commands. In those cases, the FCP_RSP IU of the last command in the set of linked commands shall be transmitted using the IU that does not allow command linking, I4 (see 9.1). See 4.5. >> LSI comment number 32 -- by George Penokie Page 12 (PDF 28), 4.9 inches from the top, 5.7 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - This << the RDDATA and WRDATA bits >> should be << the RDDATA bit and WRDATA bit >> LSI comment number 33 -- by George Penokie Page 12 (PDF 28), 5.3 inches from the top, 2.3 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - This << the RDDATA and WRDATA bit >> should be << the RDDATA bit and WRDATA bit >> LSI comment number 34 -- by George Penokie Page 12 (PDF 28), 5.7 inches from the top, 2.7 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - This << the RDDATA and WRDATA bits >> should be << the RDDATA bit and WRDATA bit >> LSI comment number 35 -- by George Penokie Page 12 (PDF 28), 6.3 inches from the top, 5.3 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - This << the RDDATA and WRDATA bits >> should be << the RDDATA bit and WRDATA bit >> LSI comment number 36 -- by George Penokie Page 12 (PDF 28), 8.1 inches from the top, 0.7 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - SAM-4 does no such thing as << SAM-4 defines a mechanism to assure ordering of commands >> so it should be deleted. LSI comment number 37 -- by George Penokie Page 12 (PDF 28), 9.3 inches from the top, 4.3 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - This << MODE SENSE and MODE SELECT commands to >> should be << MODE SENSE command and MODE SELECT command to >> LSI comment number 38 -- by George Penokie Page 12 (PDF 28), 9.7 inches from the top, 0.7 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - This << and set the enable precise delivery checking (EPDC) bit in the Fibre Channel Logical Unit Control mode page. See 10.3. >> should be << and set the EPDC bit in the Fibre Channel Logical Unit Control mode page to one (see 10.3). >> LSI comment number 39 -- by George Penokie Page 13 (PDF 29), 6.5 inches from the top, 5.3 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - This << management algorithms. See SAM-4; >> should be << management algorithms (see SAM-4); >> LSI comment number 40 -- by George Penokie Page 13 (PDF 29), 7.4 inches from the top, 6.9 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - This << that used for >> should be << that are used for >>. LSI comment number 41 -- by George Penokie Page 13 (PDF 29), 8.7 inches from the top, 2.5 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - This << (see 6.3.5) is used to negotiate >> should be << (see 6.3.5) are used to negotiate >> LSI comment number 42 -- by George Penokie Page 13 (PDF 29), 9.1 inches from the top, 0.9 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - This << Parameter page, the target >> should be << Parameter page, then the target >> LSI comment number 43 -- by George Penokie Page 14 (PDF 30), 5.0 inches from the top, 5.7 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - This << and >> should be << or >> LSI comment number 44 -- by George Penokie Page 14 (PDF 30), 3.5 inches from the top, 0.7 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - No linking so delete << If command linking is being performed, the target FCP_Port shall not request confirmed completion for an FCP_RSP IU containing INTERMEDIATE or INTERMEDIATE-CONDITION MET status. The target FCP_Port may request confirmed completion: a)when providing the FCP_RSP IU for the last command of the set of linked commands; or b)when providing the FCP_RSP IU for a command that terminates linking because of an error or CHECK CONDITION status. >> LSI comment number 45 -- by George Penokie Page 14 (PDF 30), 3.7 inches from the top, 5.5 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - This << Particular examples include: >> should be << Examples include: >> LSI comment number 46 -- by George Penokie Page 14 (PDF 30), 9.1 inches from the top, 5.8 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - This << page (see 6.3.4 and 6.3.5): >> should be << page (see 6.3.4 and 6.3.5), then: >> LSI comment number 47 -- by George Penokie Page 15 (PDF 31), 2.0 inches from the top, 0.9 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - This << request). The particular case that has been identified as a problem is related to the recovery procedure diagrammed in figure C.7. >> should be << request) (see figure C.7 for a case in which task retry identification may be used to detect that sense recovery is needed). >> LSI comment number 48 -- by George Penokie Page 15 (PDF 31), 2.0 inches from the top, 3.2 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - In a new paragraph. Change this <> to << For example, it is possible that initiator >> LSI comment number 49 -- by George Penokie Page 15 (PDF 31), 3.1 inches from the top, 0.9 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - This << Many small variations on this scenario may exist >> is not needed when the <> is added LSI comment number 50 -- by George Penokie Page 15 (PDF 31), 3.6 inches from the top, 4.9 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - There is no definition of this term << task retry identifier >>. One needs to be added to the glossary. LSI comment number 51 -- by George Penokie Page 15 (PDF 31), 4.2 inches from the top, 0.9 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - This << unambiguously relating them to the particular command >> adds nothing and should be deleted. LSI comment number 52 -- by George Penokie Page 15 (PDF 31), 4.3 inches from the top, 4.1 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - This << the FCP_CMND IU, REC ELS, and SRR FCP_LS frames. >> should be << the FCP_CMND IU frame, REC ELS frame, and SRR FCP_LS frame. >> LSI comment number 53 -- by George Penokie Page 17 (PDF 33), 6.7 inches from the top, 1.8 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - This << not configured) the target FCP_Port >> should be << not configured), then the target FCP_Port >> LSI comment number 54 -- by George Penokie Page 17 (PDF 33), 7.1 inches from the top, 4.3 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - This << and >> should be << or >> LSI comment number 55 -- by George Penokie Page 18 (PDF 34), 5.0 inches from the top, 0.7 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - This justification << To be compliant with FC-FS-3, >> is not needed and should be deleted. LSI comment number 56 -- by George Penokie Page 19 (PDF 35), 5.1 inches from the top, 4.8 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - This << command code); >> should be << command code); or>> LSI comment number 57 -- by George Penokie Page 19 (PDF 35), 7.3 inches from the top, 0.9 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - This << Tables 7 and 8 summarize >> has to be << Table 7 and table 8 summarize >> LSI comment number 58 -- by George Penokie Page 19 (PDF 35), 8.5 inches from the top, 0.9 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Most if not all of this belongs in the table footer. At a minimum the Y, N, and - need to be places in a Key list. Also single quotes indicate a character string which is not correct here. This all needs to be fixed. << A Y in the corresponding column of either table indicates the clearing effect upon successful completion of the specified action. The clearing effects are applicable only to Sequences and Exchanges associated with Fibre Channel Protocol actions. Sequences and Exchanges associated with other actions follow rules specified in FC-FS-3 or other relevant protocol standards. An N in the corresponding column indicates the clearing effect is not performed by the specified action. A - in the column indicates that the clearing effect is not applicable. Rows indicating a clearing effect for all initiator FCP_Ports have the specified clearing effect on all initiator FCP_Ports, regardless of the link that attaches the initiator FCP_Port to the target FCP_Port. >> LSI comment number 59 -- by George Penokie Page 20 (PDF 36), 5.3 inches from the top, 2.4 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - This << LIP(AL_PD,AL_PS), the >> should be << LIP(AL_PD,AL_PS), then the >> LSI comment number 60 -- by George Penokie Page 20 (PDF 36), 5.7 inches from the top, 3.9 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - This << receiving NL_Port, the receiving >> should be << receiving NL_Port, then the receiving >> LSI comment number 61 -- by George Penokie Page 21 (PDF 37), 5.6 inches from the top, 2.7 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - This << ABTS-LS that also has the >> should be << ABTS-LS which has the >> LSI comment number 62 -- by George Penokie Page 21 (PDF 37), 8.6 inches from the top, 0.9 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - This << An NL_Port shall deliver a Transport Reset notification (see SAM-4) for a Reset LIP(y,x) (see FC-AL-2) FC link event if the AL_PD matches the AL_PA of the receiving NL_Port. >> should be << If the AL_PD matches the AL_PA of the receiving NL_Port, then an NL_Port shall deliver a Transport Reset notification (see SAM-4) for a Reset LIP(y,x) (see FC-AL-2) FC link event. >> LSI comment number 63 -- by George Penokie Page 22 (PDF 38), 5.1 inches from the top, 0.7 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - This << Addressability of logical units uses the FCP_LUN field provided in the FCP_CMND IU. >> should be << Addresses of logical units are contained in the FCP_LUN field of FCP_CMD IUs. >> LSI comment number 64 -- by George Penokie Page 22 (PDF 38), 8.4 inches from the top, 1.2 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - This << registration and reservation to the initiator >> should be << registration and persistent reservation to the initiator >> LSI comment number 65 -- by George Penokie Page 25 (PDF 41), 5.4 inches from the top, 3.1 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - This << will be>> should be << is >> LSI comment number 66 -- by George Penokie Page 25 (PDF 41), 5.6 inches from the top, 1.2 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - This << condition. Consider the case where the target FCP_Port WWPN is larger than the initiator FCP_Port WWPN. In this case the target FCP_Port PLOGI ELS request will be processed, but the target FCP_Port is prohibited from transmitting a PRLI ELS. If the initiator FCP_Port does not transmit a PRLI ELS, a deadlock occurs. >> should be << condition (e.g.,. if the target FCP_Port WWPN is larger than the initiator FCP_Port WWPN, then the target FCP_Port PLOGI ELS request is processed, but the target FCP_Port is prohibited from transmitting a PRLI ELS. If the initiator FCP_Port does not transmit a PRLI ELS, a deadlock occurs). >> LSI comment number 67 -- by George Penokie Page 26 (PDF 42), 4.8 inches from the top, 5.5 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - This << Port capabilities, a single image >> should be << Port capabilities, then a single image >> LSI comment number 68 -- by George Penokie Page 26 (PDF 42), 5.4 inches from the top, 2.1 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - This << IMAGE PAIR ESTABLISHED bit in the PRLI ELS accept >> should be << IMAGE PAIR ESTABLISHED bit set to one in the PRLI ELS accept >> LSI comment number 69 -- by George Penokie Page 27 (PDF 43), 1.5 inches from the top, 1.5 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - This << condition that would normally be performed and established >> should be << condition that are normally performed and established >> LSI comment number 70 -- by George Penokie Page 28 (PDF 44), 5.0 inches from the top, 6.4 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - this << logical units, the >> should be << logical units, then the >> LSI comment number 71 -- by George Penokie Page 28 (PDF 44), 8.0 inches from the top, 0.7 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - I have no idea what the << it >> is in this statement << then it shall be used >> this needs to be fixed. LSI comment number 72 -- by George Penokie Page 28 (PDF 44), 1.5 inches from the top, 0.7 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - This << bit shall be zero, >> should be << bit shall be set to zero, >> LSI comment number 73 -- by George Penokie Page 28 (PDF 44), 2.2 inches from the top, 0.7 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - This << bit shall be zero, >> should be << bit shall be set to zero, >> LSI comment number 74 -- by George Penokie Page 28 (PDF 44), 3.1 inches from the top, 0.7 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - These two paragraphs << If the ESTABLISH IMAGE PAIR bit is set to zero, the PRLI ELS only exchanges service parameters as defined in FC-LS. If the ESTABLISH IMAGE PAIR bit is set to one, the PRLI ELS exchanges service parameters and attempts to establish an image pair as defined in FC-LS. >> should be combined to be one paragarph. LSI comment number 75 -- by George Penokie Page 28 (PDF 44), 4.2 inches from the top, 3.1 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - In most cases you are using <> in the bit descriptions. Therefore you should change this <> to a << When >>.. LSI comment number 76 -- by George Penokie Page 28 (PDF 44), 4.4 inches from the top, 2.0 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - In most cases you are using <> in the bit descriptions. Therefore you should change this <> to a << When >>.. LSI comment number 77 -- by George Penokie Page 29 (PDF 45), 2.1 inches from the top, 6.0 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - This << only if the RETRY bit is set in >> should be << only if the RETRY bit is set to one in >> LSI comment number 78 -- by George Penokie Page 29 (PDF 45), 3.1 inches from the top, 4.2 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - This << capability, overlay of data >> should be << capability, then overlay of data >> LSI comment number 79 -- by George Penokie Page 29 (PDF 45), 8.2 inches from the top, 1.3 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - This << the process does not have >> does not compute. Process is a verb but it appears to be being used as a noun here. This needs to be fixed. LSI comment number 80 -- by George Penokie Page 29 (PDF 45), 8.4 inches from the top, 0.9 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - This << the INITIATOR FUNCTION and the TARGET FUNCTION bits may be >> should be << the INITIATOR FUNCTION bit and the TARGET FUNCTION bit may be >> LSI comment number 81 -- by George Penokie Page 31 (PDF 47), 9.6 inches from the top, 6.9 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - In most cases you are using <> in the bit descriptions. Therefore you should change this <> to a << When >>.. LSI comment number 82 -- by George Penokie Page 32 (PDF 48), 1.2 inches from the top, 0.7 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - In most cases you are using <> in the bit descriptions. Therefore you should change this <> to a << When >>.. LSI comment number 83 -- by George Penokie Page 34 (PDF 50), 3.6 inches from the top, 5.0 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - This << possible >> adds nothing and should be deleted. LSI comment number 84 -- by George Penokie Page 34 (PDF 50), 3.6 inches from the top, 6.5 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - This << The object is a >> should be << The FC-4 Features object is a >> LSI comment number 85 -- by George Penokie Page 34 (PDF 50), 7.1 inches from the top, 6.1 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - This << The object is provided >> should be << The FC-4 Features object is provided >> LSI comment number 86 -- by George Penokie Page 36 (PDF 52), 2.6 inches from the top, 0.7 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - What in the world does this mean << unless unusual conditions make the retransmission impossible >>? Unless this can be quantified better it should be deleted as the << should >> allows for that. LSI comment number 87 -- by George Penokie Page 36 (PDF 52), 6.8 inches from the top, 6.0 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - This << field shall be zero >> should be << field shall be set to zero >> LSI comment number 88 -- by George Penokie Page 37 (PDF 53), 3.6 inches from the top, 0.9 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - This << A four-byte reason code shall be contained in the Data_Field >> give misleading and confusing information. It should be << A reason code shall be contained in word 1 of theFCP_RJT payload >> LSI comment number 89 -- by George Penokie Page 37 (PDF 53), 5.3 inches from the top, 3.4 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - This << contain a reason code and reason code explanation for rejecting the >> should be << contain a reason code, reason code explanation, and vendor specific information, if any, for rejecting the >> LSI comment number 90 -- by George Penokie Page 38 (PDF 54), 4.2 inches from the top, 5.0 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - This << This indicates that >> is not stated in any of the other descriptions and is not need here so it should be deleted. LSI comment number 91 -- by George Penokie Page 39 (PDF 55), 4.6 inches from the top, 1.2 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Linked commands are no longer defined in SAM-4. So these should be deleted. LSI comment number 92 -- by George Penokie Page 39 (PDF 55), 5.5 inches from the top, 1.5 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - This << T5, T7, T8, T9, T10, and T11 are obsolete >> should be << T3, T4, T5, T7, T8, T9, T10, and T11 are obsolete >> LSI comment number 93 -- by George Penokie Page 39 (PDF 55), 5.7 inches from the top, 2.0 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Should be deleted as linked commands are no more. LSI comment number 94 -- by George Penokie Page 39 (PDF 55), 5.9 inches from the top, 1.5 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - This << T3 and T4 are only permitted for linked SCSI commands >> should be deleted as linked commands are no more. LSI comment number 95 -- by George Penokie Page 39 (PDF 55), 6.1 inches from the top, 2.0 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Should be deleted as linked commands are no more. LSI comment number 96 -- by George Penokie Page 40 (PDF 56), 3.5 inches from the top, 1.9 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Should be deleted as linked commands are no more. LSI comment number 97 -- by George Penokie Page 40 (PDF 56), 4.1 inches from the top, 2.1 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - This << for linked SCSI commands or >> should be deleted as linked commands are no more. LSI comment number 98 -- by George Penokie Page 41 (PDF 57), 9.0 inches from the top, 2.1 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - This << contains a valid logical unit address the command or >> should be << contains a valid LUN the command or >> LSI comment number 99 -- by George Penokie Page 41 (PDF 57), 3.8 inches from the top, 4.6 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - This << (N-27)/4 >> should be << (n-27)/4 >> LSI comment number 100 -- by George Penokie Page 41 (PDF 57), 8.1 inches from the top, 6.0 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - This << (i.e., the logical unit number) >> should be << (i.e., the LUN) >> LSI comment number 101 -- by George Penokie Page 42 (PDF 58), 2.7 inches from the top, 0.7 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - This << shall be reserved and set to zero and >> has to either << is reserved and >> or << shall be set to zero and >>. as you cannot put requirements on a field that is reserved as reserved is a defined key word. LSI comment number 102 -- by George Penokie Page 42 (PDF 58), 6.6 inches from the top, 3.3 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Having two table sells in the description of SIMPLE does no make any sense. The 2 should be combined to one and stated as << Requests that the task be managed according to the rules for a simple task attribute and priority, if implemented (see SAM-4). LSI comment number 103 -- by George Penokie Page 43 (PDF 59), 6.7 inches from the top, 1.6 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - This << The FCP_CDB field is honored instead. >> should be << The TASK MANAGEMENT FLAGS field is ignored. >> LSI comment number 104 -- by George Penokie Page 43 (PDF 59), 7.4 inches from the top, 1.6 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - This << INQUIRY data (see SPC-4) and it shall not be sent to a logical unit with a NORMACA bit equal to zero in the standard INQUIRY data. >> should be << INQUIRY data (see SPC-4). A CLEAR ACA task management function shall not be sent to a logical unit if the NORMACA bit is set to zero in the standard INQUIRY data. >> LSI comment number 105 -- by George Penokie Page 43 (PDF 59), 8.3 inches from the top, 3.9 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - This << target FCP_Port as shown in 4.10. >> should be << target FCP_Port (see 4.10). >> LSI comment number 106 -- by George Penokie Page 43 (PDF 59), 9.1 inches from the top, 4.0 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - This << target FCP_Port as shown in 4.10. >> should be << target FCP_Port (see 4.10). >> LSI comment number 107 -- by George Penokie Page 44 (PDF 60), 1.7 inches from the top, 1.0 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - It's not important why the timeout occurred so this << Subsequent retries fail because the task resources have been cleared in the logical unit, so the initiator FCP_Port shall clear >> should be << If a timeout occurs the initiator FCP_Port shall clear >> LSI comment number 108 -- by George Penokie Page 44 (PDF 60), 1.7 inches from the top, 5.7 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Global: This structure << See 12.3. >> should only be used in glossary entries. In all other cases it should be << (see xx.x). >> as it is not clear what the see is refering to. LSI comment number 109 -- by George Penokie Page 44 (PDF 60), 3.3 inches from the top, 5.5 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - This << logical unit as shown in 4.10. >> should be << logical unit (see 4.10). >> LSI comment number 110 -- by George Penokie Page 44 (PDF 60), 4.6 inches from the top, 1.0 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - It's not important why the timeout occurred so this << Subsequent retries fail because the task resources have been cleared in the logical unit, so the initiator FCP_Port shall clear >> should be << If a timeout occurs the initiator FCP_Port shall clear >> LSI comment number 111 -- by George Penokie Page 44 (PDF 60), 7.1 inches from the top, 0.7 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - This <> has to be << The use of the NACA bit in the CDB >> as there is no such thing as an ACA bit in the CDB. LSI comment number 112 -- by George Penokie Page 44 (PDF 60), 8.7 inches from the top, 0.7 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - This << RDDATA and WRDATA bits >> should be << RDDATA bit and WRDATA bit >> LSI comment number 113 -- by George Penokie Page 45 (PDF 61), 1.4 inches from the top, 0.9 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - This << and a SCSI write operation. This is a bidirectional SCSI command. The >> should be << and a SCSI write operation (i.e., a bidirectional SCSI command). The >> LSI comment number 114 -- by George Penokie Page 46 (PDF 62), 2.5 inches from the top, 0.7 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - This << If either RDDATA or WRDATA is set to zero >> should be << If either the RDDATA bit or WRDATA bit is set to zero >> LSI comment number 115 -- by George Penokie Page 46 (PDF 62), 4.6 inches from the top, 0.7 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - This << field if requested. >> should be << field when requested. >> as I assume the data will be requested at some point. LSI comment number 116 -- by George Penokie Page 47 (PDF 63), 1.4 inches from the top, 5.1 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - This << This is the same as the SAM-4 application >> should be << This is equivalent to the SAM-4 application >> LSI comment number 117 -- by George Penokie Page 47 (PDF 63), 3.1 inches from the top, 3.8 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - This << is the same as the SCSI data delivery request >> should be << is equivalent to the SCSI data delivery request >> LSI comment number 118 -- by George Penokie Page 49 (PDF 65), 9.0 inches from the top, 4.7 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - This << Bytes 10 and 11 shall >> should be << Byte 10 and byte 11 shall >> LSI comment number 119 -- by George Penokie Page 49 (PDF 65), 8.8 inches from the top, 1.8 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - This << fields in bytes 10 and 11 summarize >> should be << fields in byte 10 and byte 11 summarize >> LSI comment number 120 -- by George Penokie Page 50 (PDF 66), 2.3 inches from the top, 0.7 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - This is no linking any more so this should be deleted << If command linking is being performed, an FCP_RSP IU is provided for each command. For linked commands, INTERMEDIATE status or INTERMEDIATE - CONDITION MET status indicates successful completion of a command with no other information valid if all other fields are zero. If command linking is requested, the use of the INTERMEDIATE or INTERMEDIATE-CONDITION MET status indicates that linking shall be performed. The LINKED COMMAND COMPLETE or LINKED COMMAND COMPLETE (WITH FLAG) Service Response defined by SAM-4 is implicit in the presentation of INTERMEDIATE or INTERMEDIATE-CONDITION MET status in the FCP_RSP IU. >> LSI comment number 121 -- by George Penokie Page 51 (PDF 67), 9.0 inches from the top, 0.9 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - This << FCP_BIDI_READ_RESID_OVER and FCP_BIDI_READ_RESID_UNDER bits >> should be << FCP_BIDI_READ_RESID_OVER bit and FCP_BIDI_READ_RESID_UNDER bit >> LSI comment number 122 -- by George Penokie Page 51 (PDF 67), 9.3 inches from the top, 0.9 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - This << FCP_BIDI_READ_RESID_OVER and FCP_BIDI_READ_RESID_UNDER bits >> should be << FCP_BIDI_READ_RESID_OVER bit and FCP_BIDI_READ_RESID_UNDER bit >> LSI comment number 123 -- by George Penokie Page 52 (PDF 68), 1.8 inches from the top, 0.7 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - You really can't put a requirement on the application to check something. So this << The application client shall examine the >> should be << The application client should examine the >> LSI comment number 124 -- by George Penokie Page 52 (PDF 68), 2.9 inches from the top, 1.2 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - You really can't put a requirement on the application to check something. So this << The application client shall examine the >> should be << The application client should examine the >> LSI comment number 125 -- by George Penokie Page 52 (PDF 68), 4.8 inches from the top, 3.9 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - You really can't put a requirement on the application to check something. So this << The application client shall examine the >> should be << The application client should examine the >> LSI comment number 126 -- by George Penokie Page 52 (PDF 68), 5.8 inches from the top, 0.7 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - This << bytes that could not be transferred >> should be << bytes that were not transferred >> LSI comment number 127 -- by George Penokie Page 52 (PDF 68), 5.8 inches from the top, 4.3 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - You really can't put a requirement on the application to check something. So this << The application client shall examine the >> should be << The application client should examine the >> LSI comment number 128 -- by George Penokie Page 52 (PDF 68), 6.9 inches from the top, 0.7 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - You really can't put a requirement on the application to check something. So this << The application client shall examine the >> should be << The application client should examine the >> LSI comment number 129 -- by George Penokie Page 52 (PDF 68), 8.3 inches from the top, 0.7 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - You really can't put a requirement on the application to check something. So this << The application client shall examine the >> should be << The application client should examine the >> LSI comment number 130 -- by George Penokie Page 53 (PDF 69), 5.2 inches from the top, 2.7 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - There is no requirement from whom to verify that the ...? I'm guessing it's the device server. If that is the case then this << There is no requirement to verify that the >> should be << There is no requirement for the device server to verify that the >> LSI comment number 131 -- by George Penokie Page 53 (PDF 69), 7.7 inches from the top, 1.1 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - This << FCP_RESID, FCP_SNS_LEN, and FCP_RSP_LEN fields if the FCP_RESID_UNDER, FCP_RESID_OVER, FCP_SNS_LEN_VALID, and FCP_RSP_LEN_VALID bits were >> should be << FCP_RESID field, FCP_SNS_LEN field, and FCP_RSP_LEN field if the FCP_RESID_UNDER bit, FCP_RESID_OVER bit, FCP_SNS_LEN_VALID bit, and FCP_RSP_LEN_VALID bit were >> LSI comment number 132 -- by George Penokie Page 54 (PDF 70), 1.5 inches from the top, 4.6 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - There is no requirement from whom to verify that the ...? I'm guessing it's the device server. If that is the case then this << There is no requirement to verify that the >> should be << There is no requirement for the device server to verify that the >> LSI comment number 133 -- by George Penokie Page 54 (PDF 70), 4.2 inches from the top, 1.2 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - This << FCP_BIDI_READ_RESID_UNDER and the FCP_RESID_OVER bits >> should be << FCP_BIDI_READ_RESID_UNDER bit and the FCP_RESID_OVER bit >> LSI comment number 134 -- by George Penokie Page 57 (PDF 73), 6.7 inches from the top, 0.9 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - This << normally the Fibre Channel interface circuitry >> contains no information useful to this standard and should be deleted. LSI comment number 135 -- by George Penokie Page 58 (PDF 74), 8.1 inches from the top, 0.7 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - All this should be above the table 29. And it should have some kind of introduction like << This mode page uses interconnection tenancy to define a period of time when ... >> Move this << An interconnect tenancy is the period of time when an FCP device owns or may access a shared Fibre Channel interconnect. For arbitrated loops (see FC-AL-2) and Fibre Channel Class 1 connections, a tenancy typically begins when an FCP device successfully opens the connection and ends when the FCP device releases the connection for use by other device pairs. Data and other information transfers take place during interconnect tenancies. Point-to-point or fabric-attached Class 2 or Class 3 links and many other configurations do not have a concept of interconnect tenancy and may perform transfers at any time. >> LSI comment number 136 -- by George Penokie Page 59 (PDF 75), 9.7 inches from the top, 0.9 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - This <> should be << The no limit option (i.e., the zero value) shall be implemented by all FCP devices. >> LSI comment number 137 -- by George Penokie Page 60 (PDF 76), 5.0 inches from the top, 1.3 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - This << The FAA bit controls >> needs the have the full name of the bit listed. It should be << The xxxx xxxx xxxx (FAA) bit controls >>. LSI comment number 138 -- by George Penokie Page 60 (PDF 76), 3.9 inches from the top, 1.2 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - This << FAA, FAB, FAC bits >> should be << FAA bit, FAB bit , and FAC bit >> LSI comment number 139 -- by George Penokie Page 60 (PDF 76), 5.2 inches from the top, 0.7 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - This << The FAA bit controls arbitration when the target FCP_Port has one or more FCP_DATA IU frames to transmit to an initiator FCP_Port. >> should be in it's own paragraph. LSI comment number 140 -- by George Penokie Page 60 (PDF 76), 5.4 inches from the top, 0.7 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - This << The FAB bit controls >> needs the have the full name of the bit listed. It should be << The xxxx xxxx xxxx (FAB) bit controls >>. LSI comment number 141 -- by George Penokie Page 60 (PDF 76), 5.9 inches from the top, 0.7 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - This << The FAC bit controls >> needs the have the full name of the bit listed. It should be << The xxxx xxxx xxxx (FAC) bit controls >>. LSI comment number 142 -- by George Penokie Page 60 (PDF 76), 9.6 inches from the top, 4.2 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - This << value of this parameter to adjust internal >> should be << value of this field to adjust internal >> LSI comment number 143 -- by George Penokie Page 61 (PDF 77), 1.8 inches from the top, 2.1 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - This << the MODE SENSE and MODE SELECT command >> should be << the MODE SENSE command and MODE SELECT command >> LSI comment number 144 -- by George Penokie Page 61 (PDF 77), 5.3 inches from the top, 3.9 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - This << bit of one indicates that >> should be << bit set to one indicates that >> LSI comment number 145 -- by George Penokie Page 61 (PDF 77), 6.2 inches from the top, 3.6 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - This << the MODE SENSE and MODE SELECT command >> should be << the MODE SENSE command and MODE SELECT command >> LSI comment number 146 -- by George Penokie Page 61 (PDF 77), 8.1 inches from the top, 0.9 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - This << logical unit 0 >> should be << LUN 0 >> as that is what it is called in SAM-4. LSI comment number 147 -- by George Penokie Page 61 (PDF 77), 8.1 inches from the top, 4.4 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - This << logical unit 0 >> should be << LUN 0 >> as that is what it is called in SAM-4. LSI comment number 148 -- by George Penokie Page 61 (PDF 77), 8.2 inches from the top, 4.7 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - This << the MODE SENSE and MODE SELECT command >> should be << the MODE SENSE command and MODE SELECT command >> LSI comment number 149 -- by George Penokie Page 61 (PDF 77), 8.7 inches from the top, 0.9 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - This << Some of the bits defined by the Fibre Channel >> should be << Some of the bits values defined by the Fibre Channel >> LSI comment number 150 -- by George Penokie Page 61 (PDF 77), 8.7 inches from the top, 5.0 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - This << page require the FCP_Port to violate one >> should be << page results in the FCP_Port to violating one >> LSI comment number 151 -- by George Penokie Page 61 (PDF 77), 9.2 inches from the top, 0.4 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - This << Some of the bits defined by the Fibre Channel Port Control mode page require the FCP_Port to violate one or more of the Fibre Channel standards. The non-standard behaviors have been identified as useful for certain specialized operating environments. >> should be a note. LSI comment number 152 -- by George Penokie Page 65 (PDF 81), 2.9 inches from the top, 6.9 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - In table 33 the << Notes >> column should be deleted to be replaced with the T10 standard table notes styles. This will add, for example, a superscript << b >>and a superscript << c >> at the end of the << E_D_TOV >> term in the timer column. LSI comment number 153 -- by George Penokie Page 65 (PDF 81), 7.7 inches from the top, 1.1 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - This << NOTES:>> needs to be deleted as it does not follow the t10 style guide. LSI comment number 154 -- by George Penokie Page 65 (PDF 81), 9.6 inches from the top, 1.3 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - The notation for an unordered list is a), b), c) not a,b,c this needs to be fixed. LSI comment number 155 -- by George Penokie Page 65 (PDF 81), 9.9 inches from the top, 1.1 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Table notes are indicate with small letter not numbers. LSI comment number 156 -- by George Penokie Page 66 (PDF 82), 4.5 inches from the top, 0.9 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - This << S_ID, D_ID, OX_ID, RX_ID, and SEQ_ID fields >> should be << S_ID filed, D_ID field, OX_ID field, RX_ID field, and SEQ_ID field >> LSI comment number 157 -- by George Penokie Page 66 (PDF 82), 8.4 inches from the top, 3.7 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - This << expiration of RR_TOV, a target FCP >> should be << expiration of RR_TOV, then a target FCP >> LSI comment number 158 -- by George Penokie Page 67 (PDF 83), 3.3 inches from the top, 1.8 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - This << FCP_Port (optional) >> should be << CP_Port (optional). >>. The period is missing. LSI comment number 159 -- by George Penokie Page 68 (PDF 84), 2.8 inches from the top, 4.2 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - This << associated resources as described in 12.3. >> should be << associated resources (see 12.3). >> LSI comment number 160 -- by George Penokie Page 68 (PDF 84), 4.4 inches from the top, 2.0 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - This << recovery as described in 12.4 shall >> should be << recovery (see 12.4) shall >> LSI comment number 161 -- by George Penokie Page 68 (PDF 84), 7.7 inches from the top, 2.0 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - This << defined in FC-FS-3, the same recovery >> should be << defined in FC-FS-3, then the same recovery >> LSI comment number 162 -- by George Penokie Page 69 (PDF 85), 9.0 inches from the top, 2.9 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - This << further >> should be deleted as it adds nothing and could be confusing LSI comment number 163 -- by George Penokie Page 69 (PDF 85), 4.1 inches from the top, 2.8 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - This << further >> should be deleted as it adds nothing and could be confusing. LSI comment number 164 -- by George Penokie Page 69 (PDF 85), 7.5 inches from the top, 2.8 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - This << further >> should be deleted as it adds nothing and could be confusing LSI comment number 165 -- by George Penokie Page 69 (PDF 85), 9.9 inches from the top, 1.4 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Marked set by George Penokie LSI comment number 166 -- by George Penokie Page 70 (PDF 86), 1.9 inches from the top, 2.6 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - This << task management request or because of an error. >> should be << task management request or an error. >> LSI comment number 167 -- by George Penokie Page 70 (PDF 86), 3.4 inches from the top, 5.1 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - This << the OX_ID and RX_ID field values >> should be << the OX_ID field and RX_ID field values >> LSI comment number 168 -- by George Penokie Page 70 (PDF 86), 6.5 inches from the top, 2.4 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - This << error recovery as described in 12.5 shall be >> should be << error recovery (see 12.5) shall be >> LSI comment number 169 -- by George Penokie Page 70 (PDF 86), 9.4 inches from the top, 0.7 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - This << If the RX_ID field is FFFFh, target FCP_Ports shall >> should be << If the RX_ID field contains FFFFh, target FCP_Ports shall >> LSI comment number 170 -- by George Penokie Page 71 (PDF 87), 3.0 inches from the top, 0.8 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - The indentation of the nested list is not correct. Look at the T10 style guide for the correct indentation. LSI comment number 171 -- by George Penokie Page 72 (PDF 88), 3.8 inches from the top, 0.7 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - This << an ABTS-LS as specified in 12.3. >> should be << an ABTS-LS (see 12.3). >> LSI comment number 172 -- by George Penokie Page 72 (PDF 88), 4.3 inches from the top, 2.7 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - This << recovery as described in 12.5 shall be performed >> should be << recovery shall be performed (see 12.5). >> LSI comment number 173 -- by George Penokie Page 73 (PDF 89), 9.0 inches from the top, 1.7 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - This << same S_ID;and >> should be << same S_ID; and >>. Missing space. LSI comment number 174 -- by George Penokie Page 74 (PDF 90), 6.7 inches from the top, 4.3 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - This << next data requested, the initiator FCP >> should be << next data requested, then the initiator FCP >>. LSI comment number 175 -- by George Penokie Page 74 (PDF 90), 7.5 inches from the top, 0.7 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - This << The target FCP_Port shall first transmit the FCP_ACC for the SRR FCP_LS request, then shall retransmit the requested data specified by the SRR FCP_LS request in a new Sequence, and then complete the Exchange in the normal manner, including transmitting or retransmitting the FCP_RSP IU.>> should be converted into an ordered list. In it's current form it is virtually incomprehensible. LSI comment number 176 -- by George Penokie Page 75 (PDF 91), 7.7 inches from the top, 2.6 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - This << within E_D_TOV, the target FCP_ >> should be << within E_D_TOV, then the target FCP_ >> LSI comment number 177 -- by George Penokie Page 75 (PDF 91), 7.9 inches from the top, 2.4 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - This << PARAMETER field bot 0 set to one >> should be << PARAMETER field bit 0 set to one >> LSI comment number 178 -- by George Penokie Page 76 (PDF 92), 3.5 inches from the top, 2.3 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - This << are unsuccessful, the initiator FCP >> should be << are unsuccessful, then the initiator FCP >> LSI comment number 179 -- by George Penokie Page 76 (PDF 92), 4.5 inches from the top, 3.9 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - This << times R_A_TOVELS, the initiator FCP_Port >> should be << times R_A_TOVELS, then the initiator FCP_Port >> LSI comment number 180 -- by George Penokie Page 76 (PDF 92), 5.3 inches from the top, 4.6 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - This << times R_A_TOVELS, the initiator FCP_Port >> should be << times R_A_TOVELS, then the initiator FCP_Port >> LSI comment number 181 -- by George Penokie Page 76 (PDF 92), 7.4 inches from the top, 4.8 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - This << times R_A_TOVELS, the initiator FCP_Port >> should be << times R_A_TOVELS, then the initiator FCP_Port >> LSI comment number 182 -- by George Penokie Page 77 (PDF 93), 2.0 inches from the top, 0.9 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - This << frame, the FCP device shall discard >> should be << frame, then the FCP device shall discard >> LSI comment number 183 -- by George Penokie Page 78 (PDF 94), 6.0 inches from the top, 1.6 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - This << NOTES:>> needs to be deleted as it does not follow the t10 style guide. LSI comment number 184 -- by George Penokie Page 78 (PDF 94), 6.9 inches from the top, 1.4 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Table notes are indicated with small letter not numbers. LSI comment number 185 -- by George Penokie Page 79 (PDF 95), 3.1 inches from the top, 4.6 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - This << (note 1) >> needs to be replaced with a superscript << a >> to comply with the T10 standard table notes styles. LSI comment number 186 -- by George Penokie Page 79 (PDF 95), 3.3 inches from the top, 4.8 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - This << (note 2) >> needs to be replaced with a superscript << b >> to comply with the T10 standard table notes styles. LSI comment number 187 -- by George Penokie Page 79 (PDF 95), 3.6 inches from the top, 4.8 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - This << (note 2) >> needs to be replaced with a superscript << b >> to comply with the T10 standard table notes styles. LSI comment number 188 -- by George Penokie Page 79 (PDF 95), 3.9 inches from the top, 4.8 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - This << (note 2) >> needs to be replaced with a superscript << b >> to comply with the T10 standard table notes styles. LSI comment number 189 -- by George Penokie Page 79 (PDF 95), 9.7 inches from the top, 1.5 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Table notes are indicated with small letter not numbers. LSI comment number 190 -- by George Penokie Page 80 (PDF 96), 3.2 inches from the top, 5.8 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Thie << SCSI initiators or targets. >> needs to match whatever you put in the glossary for these two entities. LSI comment number 191 -- by George Penokie Page 86 (PDF 102), 6.4 inches from the top, 0.7 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Delete this section << B.1.11SCSI linked commands >> as linked commands are no longer defined. LSI comment number 192 -- by George Penokie Page 88 (PDF 104), 2.8 inches from the top, 1.3 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - This figure title << Figure B.1 - Example of class 2 FCP write operation >> needs to move to the bottom of the figure. LSI comment number 193 -- by George Penokie Page 89 (PDF 105), 2.6 inches from the top, 1.1 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - This is no reference to figure B.2. One needs to be added. LSI comment number 194 -- by George Penokie Page 89 (PDF 105), 7.8 inches from the top, 2.7 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - This figure title << Figure B.2 - Example of class 2 FCP_DATA write >> needs to move to the bottom of the figure. LSI comment number 195 -- by George Penokie Page 90 (PDF 106), 7.9 inches from the top, 2.4 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - This figure title << Figure B.3 - Example of class 2 FCP read operation >> needs to move to the bottom of the figure. LSI comment number 196 -- by George Penokie Page 91 (PDF 107), 4.0 inches from the top, 0.8 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - This is no reference to figure B.4. One needs to be added. LSI comment number 197 -- by George Penokie Page 91 (PDF 107), 8.3 inches from the top, 2.7 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - This figure title << Figure B.4 - Example of class 2 FCP_DATA read >> needs to move to the bottom of the figure. LSI comment number 198 -- by George Penokie Page 93 (PDF 109), 1.1 inches from the top, 2.6 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - None of the figure in this section are referenced. This has to be fixed. I suggest you build a table at the beginning of the section that contains all the names of the figures with a reference to each figure placed in a column. LSI comment number 199 -- by George Penokie Page 93 (PDF 109), 1.2 inches from the top, 0.9 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - All the figures in this section have the titles at the top of the figure. They all have to be move to the bottom of the figure. LSI comment number 200 -- by George Penokie Page 93 (PDF 109), 1.2 inches from the top, 6.2 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - The paragraph spacing in inconsistent in the figures in this section. Some have no line spacing and other have a line space between the paragraphs. All paragraphs should have a line space between them. This needs to be fixed. LSI comment number 201 -- by George Penokie Page 93 (PDF 109), 2.8 inches from the top, 0.8 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - The font size in the paragraphs in all the figures seems to be larger that 10 point. If that is the case it needs to be changed to 10 point. LSI comment number 202 -- by George Penokie Page 94 (PDF 110), 5.2 inches from the top, 2.1 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - This << LS_RJT (Logical error, Invalid OX_ID - RX_ID combination) for >> should be << LS_RJT (i.e., Logical error, Invalid OX_ID - RX_ID combination) for >> LSI comment number 203 -- by George Penokie Page 97 (PDF 113), 4.7 inches from the top, 1.3 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - This << Exchange. (LS_ACC to REC ELS arrived before FCP_XFER_RDY, out of order). >> should be << Exchange (i.e., LS_ACC to REC ELS arrived before FCP_XFER_RDY, out of order). >> LSI comment number 204 -- by George Penokie Page 100 (PDF 116), 4.4 inches from the top, 0.9 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - This << Exchange. (LS_ACC to REC ELS arrived before FCP_RSP was sent). >> should be << Exchange. (i.e., LS_ACC to REC ELS arrived before FCP_RSP was sent). >> LSI comment number 205 -- by George Penokie Page 126 (PDF 142), 4.4 inches from the top, 0.7 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - You should add hyperlinks to these steps << step 2 and step 3 >> LSI comment number 206 -- by George Penokie Page 127 (PDF 143), 1.2 inches from the top, 3.1 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - You should add a hyperlink to this step << step 1 >> LSI comment number 207 -- by George Penokie Page 127 (PDF 143), 5.4 inches from the top, 1.5 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - This << during fabric login, a configuration change >> should be << during fabric login, then a configuration change >> LSI comment number 208 -- by George Penokie Page 128 (PDF 144), 3.7 inches from the top, 0.7 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - This << transmit an ABTS frame. When it does so, the specified fields should be set as shown in table E.1. >> should be << transmit an ABTS frame and when they do the specified fields should be set as shown in table E.1. >> LSI comment number 209 -- by George Penokie Page 129 (PDF 145), 1.6 inches from the top, 0.9 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - This <> should be << with BA_ACC and when they do the BA_ACC should be as shown in table E.2.>> LSI comment number 210 -- by George Penokie Page 129 (PDF 145), 3.1 inches from the top, 6.7 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - All the Content cell except the one that states << Recipient >> should have a period at the end of the comment. LSI comment number 211 -- by George Penokie Page 129 (PDF 145), 4.1 inches from the top, 4.9 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - This << Invalid (dont care) for Abort >> should be << Invalid (i.e., dont care) for Abort >> LSI comment number 212 -- by George Penokie Page 130 (PDF 146), 1.6 inches from the top, 0.7 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - This << BA_RJT. When it does, the BA_RJT should be as shown in table E.3 >> should be << BA_RJT and when they do the BA_RJT should be as shown in table E.3 >> LSI comment number 213 -- by George Penokie Page 130 (PDF 146), 2.7 inches from the top, 4.9 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - This << OX_ID field value from ABTS frame >> should be << OX_ID field value from ABTS frame. >> Period added. LSI comment number 214 -- by George Penokie Page 130 (PDF 146), 3.1 inches from the top, 4.9 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - This << RX_ID field value from ABTS frame >> should be << RX_ID field value from ABTS frame. >> Period added. LSI comment number 215 -- by George Penokie Page 130 (PDF 146), 7.5 inches from the top, 5.8 inches from the left - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - All the Content cell except the one that states << FFFFh >> should have a period at the end of the comment. ************************************************************** Comments attached to Abs ballot from Gregory Tabor of Maxim Integrated Products: FCP-4 is outside of Maxim's domain of interest and expertise. ************************************************************** Comments attached to No ballot from Frederick Knight of NetApp: NetApp 1 (T) Page: 17 Location: Table 3 Problem Description: SAM I_T NEXUS RESET function is missing. Suggested Solution: Table 7 seems to indicate that LOGO ELS has the appropriate clearing effect; clause 4.11 also says a LOGO ELS causes an I_T nexus loss. NetApp 2 (T) Page: 21 Location: Table 8 Problem Description: Missing Column for I_T NEXUS RESET Suggested Solution: add a column for INITIATOR FCP_PORT action of I_T NEXUS RESET NetApp 3 (T) Page: 34 Location: Clause 7 Problem Description: 08-366r0 is missing Suggested Solution: NetApp 4 (T) Page: 39 Location: Table 19 Problem Description: Row T3 and T4 still contains references to Linked SCSI Commands Suggested Solution: Search whole document for references to Linked SCSI Commands, and remove such references NetApp 5 (T) Page: 40 Location: Table 20 Problem Description: Row I5 contains another "Linked" reference Suggested Solution: remove NetApp 6 (T) Page: 50 Location: 9.5.1 Problem Description: INTERMEDIATE status went away with linked commands Suggested Solution: Search whole document for references to INTERMEDIATE SCSI status (or INTERMEDIATE - CONDITION MET) and remove such references NetApp 7 (T) Page: 51 Location: 9.5.2 Problem Description: I could not find "retry delay" anything in SAM-4 Suggested Solution: Find the correct reference in SAM-4 (STATUS QUALIFIER?) NetApp 8 (T) Page: 86 Location: B.1.11 Problem Description: SCSI Linked Commands - are gone Suggested Solution: remove the whole clause ************************************************************** Comments attached to Abs ballot from Mark Overby of Nvidia Corp.: 1. NVIDIA abstains due to a lack of technical expertise in the material that the standard covers. ************************************************************** Comments attached to Abs ballot from Mark Evans of Western Digital: My company is not materially affected by this standard, as we have no Fibre Channel products. ******************** End of Ballot Report ********************