00-279r0 Large SCSI Device Identifiers
gericson at mindspring.com
Sun Jul 9 19:16:24 PDT 2000
* From the T10 Reflector (t10 at t10.org), posted by:
* "George Ericson" <gericson at mindspring.com>
Readers should be clear that the SCSI Device Identifiers refered to here
identify the SCSI Interconnect Ports through which a SCSI target is reached.
These identifiers do not identify the Logical Units of a target. Nor are
they the identifier for the Target. (Although there is ongoing discussion
that would change the specs to restrict Target to single port, which would
effectively make that address the target address. [This restriction is not
Question: Is the ISCSI or VI session between Application Client and Target
(Manager) or between Application Client and LU (Device Server). If the
latter, then addresses should use the 128 bit LU WWN. Not the 64 bit SCSI
Device Identifier and a LUN.
Assertion: There is no need to change XOR or Extended Copy to support wider,
path dependent, address forms. Supporting detail follows.
For SCSI Extended Copy: The only Path Independent LU address format is the
Type E4: "Identification descriptor target descriptor format". Remember
that addresses must be specified from the point of view of the Copy Manager
Device. Path dependent formats are not robust with respect to changes in
path to the LU. The E4 type address is robust and since the address names
the target LU and not the path, it is not sensitive to the SCSI Interconnect
For the XOR commands: The LUs specified in the XOR commands are identified
by 8-byte LUNs. In any case, these LUNs must be specified with respect to
the LU that processes the command. Additionally, a 1-byte Target
Identifier (or low order 8 bits of or a 2-byte LUN) form is only used within
XDWRITE EXTENDED. This might have been OK with SPI, but is rather painful
for FC, IP, VI, ... and other LLPs that support many more ports per
interconnect and LUs per port. Eight-Byte LUNs may or may not be path
dependent. (Path independence is achieved by the use Virtual LUNs to name
the other LUs the primary LU is willing to deal with. Regardless, it should
support REPORT LUNS and, between the LU and its target, it should allow
INQUIRE to be sent to the LUs addressed by the reported LUNs. If these
commands are extended, either use all 8-byte LUNs or use the LU's WWN as in
Extended copy. Do not extend these commands by adding path dependent
|From: owner-t10 at t10.org [mailto:owner-t10 at t10.org]On Behalf Of
|Sent: Saturday, July 08, 2000 6:17 PM
|To: T10 Reflector
|Subject: 00-279r0 Large SCSI Device Identifiers
|* From the T10 Reflector (t10 at t10.org), posted by:
|* "Edward A. Gardner" <eag at ophidian.com>
|Document: T10/00-279r0 Date: July 8, 2000
|To: T10 Committee Membership
|From: Edward A. Gardner, Ophidian Designs
|Subject: Large SCSI Device Identifiers
|The current SCSI standards specify that every SCSI device shall have a
|64-bit device identifier. Quoting from SAM-2 revision 13, page 24:
| An Initiator Identifier is a field containing up to 64 bits that is
| a SCSI device identifier for the initiator device.
| A Target Identifier is a field containing up to 64 bits that is a
| SCSI device identifier for the target device.
|Unfortunately, 64-bits is no longer sufficient to identify a
|forthcoming protocols. For example, SVP will need to identify
|or target by a VI address. Many VI implementations construct a
|from an IPv6 address plus a discriminator. Since an IPv6 address is 128
|bits, this cannot fit within a 64-bit field. For another
|the various proposals for SCSI over IP (Internet Protocol). At
|iSCSI, is proposing to identify devices by URL strings.
|There are two approaches to dealing with this problem. One is
|to have each
|protocol that encounters this problem define a protocol specific device
|identifier mapping. For example, SVP would define an SVP
|specific 64-bit to
|VI address identifier mapping, with a protocol specific way
|to load and maintain the mapping table in targets. While that
|could be done,
|I believe it is fundamentally a kludge and will lead to
|and compatibility problems.
|The other approach is to alter the relevant SCSI standards to
|larger device identifiers. This document sketches how that
|might be done. If
|the committee agrees that this is the proper approach, I will prepare
|detailed proposals for the affected standards for discussion
|at this falls
|So far as I am aware, device identifier size only affects third-party
|operations, those where one target is asked to become a
|to access another target. The two important third-party operations are
|EXTENDED COPY and the third-party disk XOR operations. My
|impression is that
|other third-party operations (e.g. third-party RESERVATION)
|are obsolete and
|need not be supported. If anyone disagrees with these
|assumptions, I trust
|they will let us know.
|With these assumptions, the affected documents are SAM-2,
|SPC-3 and SBC-2.
|The changes I plan to propose to each are summarized below.
|The existing statements about the size of device identifiers would be
|removed. If SAM-2 says anything at all about device identifier size, it
|should say that it is protocol specific.
|The EXTENDED COPY command references a lengthy parameter list
|its operation. The parameter list contains a header, a list of target
|descriptors, a list of segment descriptors and an inline data area.
|Target descriptors are fixed length, 32-byte constructs. They include a
|24-byte field available to identify the target and LUN.
|Various formats of
|target descriptors are defined that include Fibre Channel and
|Segment descriptors define a data transfer to be performed by
|COPY command. They identify source and destination target devices with
|offsets into the list of target descriptors. Various formats
|kinds of data transfer operations. One format copies data from
|data area to the destination device, presumably for writing
|labels and other
|control information. The inline data to be copied is
|identified by a 4-byte
|offset and a 4-byte length.
|I plan to propose one or more new target descriptor formats. The actual
|target identifier would be stored in the inline data area. The
|descriptor format would contain a LUN (8 bytes), offset to the target
|identifier (4 bytes), length of the target identifier (2 or 4
|bytes) and a
|target identifier format code (2 bytes). Target identifier format codes
|would include values for unspecified, FC-VI, Infiniband, etc.
|codes serve much the same purpose as the current multiple
|formats of Fibre
|Channel target descriptors, one for port identifier, one for
|port WWN, one
|for both, etc.
|I am also tempted to allow the LUNs device identification VPD
|data to be
|specified (e.g. the LUNs WWN) within the inline data area,
|analogous to the
|current Identification descriptor target descriptor format. I welcome
|comments on whether this would be useful.
|The third-party XOR commands identify the secondary target
|using a one byte
|SECONDARY ADDRESS field. For parallel SCSI this is the target
|For Fibre Channel it specifies the low byte of the second targets port
|identifier; the other bytes of the port identifier are the same as the
|The third-party XOR commands also contain a TABLE ADDRESS
|flag. When that
|flag is zero, the commands operate as described above. When
|that flag is
|one, SBC / SBC-2 specify:
| A TABLE ADDRESS bit of one indicates that the SECONDARY ADDRESS
| field contains a pointer to a look up table of ANSI X3.270 SAM
| compliant target identifiers. The look up table is reserved for
| future definition.
|I plan to propose that we define the format of the lookup
|table for SBC-2. I
|plan to propose a table format that is a strict subset of that used by
|EXTENDED COPY. The header, target descriptors and inline data
|area would be
|identical. Segment descriptors would be prohibited. I believe
|that all the
|target descriptor formats defined by EXTENDED COPY should be supported.
|I would like to have SBC-2 cross-reference SPC-3 for the table format,
|rather than redefining it within SBC-2. Is that legitimate?
|Does it require
|any re-structuring of either standard?
|I believe the table should be volatile, reset on power-up or
|resets the LUN. There should be exactly one copy per LUN, shared by all
|initiators. The maximum table length is close to 256*32 or
|8192 bytes plus
|the inline data, perhaps about 64Kbytes total. Thats too large to fit
|easily into our mode page structure. We could segment the
|table, but I dont
|like that, I think it should be loaded by a single command, The other
|choices are a new command or to define one of the reserved
|bytes in MODE
|SELECT to indicate the type of mode information provided. I have no
|preference between these last two choices. I would also welcome other
|Edward A. Gardner eag at ophidian.com
|Ophidian Designs 719 593-8866 voice
|1262 Hofstead Terrace 719 593-8989 fax
|Colorado Springs, CO 80907 719 210-7200 cell
|* For T10 Reflector information, send a message with
|* 'info t10' (no quotes) in the message body to majordomo at t10.org
* For T10 Reflector information, send a message with
* 'info t10' (no quotes) in the message body to majordomo at t10.org
More information about the T10