Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2006 10:19:13 -0500 Subject: Re: [T11.3] FCP-4: Continuously Increasing SEQ_CNT From: "Craig W. Carlson" <craig.carlson@qlogic.com> To: <Bob.Nixon@emulex.com>, <David.Peterson@mcdata.com>, T10 <t10@t10.org> CC: T11_3 <t11_3@t11.org> X-Message-Number: 7325 Formatted message: HTML-formatted message Iąd have to agree with Bob on this one. We are aware of devices which cannot support CISC, and which would seriously break if presented with it. A change such as this (either a or b) could create havoc with device interoperability. +Craig On 10/13/06 6:08 PM, "Bob.Nixon@Emulex.Com" <Bob.Nixon@Emulex.Com> wrote: > Dave, > > Despite the potential value of CISC to FCP operation in Class 3, we must > advise against requiring or even recommending it. > > In our interoperability testing, we have discovered there are devices with > significant installed base that do not behave properly when actually presented > with CISC. Unfortunately, they do not reject an N_Port Login that offers > CISC, so this problem is not discoverable. > > Even recommending CISC in a standard would therefore increase the incidence of > interoperability problems with use of Fibre Channel. > > - Bob Nixon, Emulex alternate representative > > -----Original Message----- > From: t11_3-bounces@listserve.com [mailto:t11_3-bounces@listserve.com]On > Behalf Of David Peterson > Sent: Sunday, October 08, 2006 12:34 PM > To: t10@t10.org > Cc: t11_3@t11.org > Subject: [T11.3] FCP-4: Continuously Increasing SEQ_CNT > > Howdy All, > > At the last FCP-4 working group meeting I presented a proposal to request the > use of continuously increasing SEQ_CNT (CISC) for Class 3 service. > > While most believe requiring continuously increasing SEQ_CNT for Class 3 > service is a good idea, one vendor indicated that none of their > implementations support CISC, and another vendor was concerned about the > requirement. > > As such, we have the following options: > > a. require CISC for Class 3 service. This means that existing implementations > can claim compliance to a prior standard (e.g., FCP-3); > b. specify that CISC should be used for Class 3 service; > c. no change (i.e., CISC is not required except for streamed Sequences). > > My preference would be option a. > > What say ye? > > ...Dave > > (no disclaimer) > > > > > _______________________________________________ > T11_3 mailing list > http://mailman.listserve.com/listmanager/listinfo/t11_3 ------------------------------------------------------------------ Craig W. Carlson mailto:craig.carlson@qlogic.com QLogic Corporation (952) 932-4064 6321 Bury Drive Eden Prairie, MN 55346