Obsolete mixed command and data, mixed data and response
Talluto, Dennis
dennis.talluto at eds.com
Thu Nov 19 08:25:08 PST 1998
* From the T10 (formerly SCSI) Reflector (t10 at symbios.com), posted by:
* "Talluto, Dennis" <dennis.talluto at eds.com>
*
Bob,
I completely agree with your comments regarding the need to standards that
are completely and unabiguously documented.
So let's start a New Year's Resolution for 1999 -
No more T10 and T11 proposals/ballots/standards without STATE DIAGRAMS.
This surely will stamp out YEARS of FUD !!
Dennis Talluto
EDS/Infrastructure Systems Templates
office: 248.853.3521
email: dennis.talluto at eds.com
> ----------
> From: Bob Snively[SMTP:Bob.Snively at ebay.sun.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, November 18, 1998 3:56 PM
> To: Gene_Milligan at notes.seagate.com; Bob.Snively at ebay.sun.com;
> Douglas.Hagerman at digital.com
> Cc: fc at nsco.network.com; t10 at symbios.com
> Subject: RE: Obsolete mixed command and data, mixed data and response
>
>
> Sorry Doug, I really have no nefarious agenda here. The function is
> poorly, incompletely, and ambiguously documented, which is true of most
> of the "creeping elegance" features that we have allowed into our
> documents and which I have, with far too little success, attempted to
> stamp out every time I have found a good target. Their documentation is
> poor because nobody has tried to implement them and been forced to ask
> the hard question, "what does that really mean?".
>
> To make a product interoperable, robust, low in cost, easy to test, and
> high in performance requires that the standards that define the interface
> be simple and clean.
>
> If this particular element of creeping elegance has struck your company's
> fancy as being particularly useful, then I would expect to receive
> a "please do not remove this function" message together with a dozen
> pages of comments and criticisms so that we can document it
> unambiguously in the standard. This in fact is exactly what has happened
> with most "creeping goodness" features that achieved the coveted goodness
> label,
> including such examples as tagged queueing, arbitrated loop, concise
> exchange status ELS's, persistent reservations, high speed parallel
> transfers, Command Reference Numbers, and FCP_CONF.
>
> Bob
>
> >
> > I agree with Gene that the recent wholesale effort to eliminate
> > "obsolete" or "unused" functions from established standards is an
> > objectionable practise. For one thing, it puts yet another burden on all
> > users of the standards because now we need to keep track on a monthly
> > basis to make sure that something we're using doesn't disappear. For
> > another thing, the method used seems to have some of the flavor of a
> > fishing expedition. What if I'm using this and don't want to tell you?
>
>
*
* For T10 Reflector information, send a message with
* 'info t10' (no quotes) in the message body to majordomo at symbios.com
More information about the T10
mailing list