More SBC-2 items to obsolete

Ralph O. Weber roweber at IEEE.org
Mon Aug 30 19:19:50 PDT 2004


* From the T10 Reflector (t10 at t10.org), posted by:
* "Ralph O. Weber" <roweber at ieee.org>
*
I see no reason why SBC-2 cannot be written in such a way
as to provide interoperability. And, I see Rob's efforts as
being the means to that end.

If SBC-2 does not define interoperability, then arguably
it has failed its purpose as a standard.

Fix SBC-2. Do not develop more documents.

.Ralph

Lawrence Chen wrote:

>* From the T10 Reflector (t10 at t10.org), posted by:
>* "Lawrence Chen" <LawrenceChen at MaXXan.com>
>*
>Hi Ralph,
>
>Let me remind you that in 1997-2000+, the industry used the
>FC-PLDA disk attach profile as a development and interoperability
>guide. IMHO, this profile, along with the many participating
>companies and UNH, was a huge reason for the success of the FC market
>today.
>
>At the time, the FC-PH-1/2, FC-AL-1/2, FCP, SAM, SPC, SBC, and SCC-1/2
>standards were all relevant for a typical FCP disk attachment. There
>were just too many choices within each of the above standards to allow
>for any meaningful interoperability. Then, along came FC-PLDA and the rest
>is history.
>
>Things have definitely calmed down since those days from an end-node
>interoperability standpoint but IMO, the need for an end-node profile
>up through SCSI command sets still remain.
>
>Best Regards,
>
>Lawrence Chen
>
>Principal Member of Technical Staff (PMTS)
>MaXXan Systems, Inc.
>
>(408) 382-6427 (V)
>(832) 382-6599 (F)
>(408) 204-2460 (C)
>
>LawrenceChen at maxxan.com
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Ralph O. Weber [mailto:roweber at IEEE.org]
>Sent: Saturday, August 28, 2004 6:58 AM
>To: t10 at t10.org
>Subject: Re: More SBC-2 items to obsolete
>
>
>* From the T10 Reflector (t10 at t10.org), posted by:
>* "Ralph O. Weber" <roweber at ieee.org>
>*
>Why should people have to buy two standards instead of one?
>
>.Ralph
>
>Lawrence Chen wrote:
>
>  
>
>>* From the T10 Reflector (t10 at t10.org), posted by:
>>* "Lawrence Chen" <LawrenceChen at MaXXan.com>
>>*
>>Hi Jim and Bob,
>>
>>obsolescing commands are nice but creating an up to date
>>scsi disk profile would be even better :)
>>
>>Best Regards,
>>
>>Lawrence Chen
>>
>>Principal Member of Technical Staff (PMTS)
>>MaXXan Systems, Inc.
>>
>>(408) 382-6427 (V)
>>(832) 382-6599 (F)
>>(408) 204-2460 (C)
>>
>>LawrenceChen at maxxan.com
>>
>>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: Robert Snively [mailto:rsnively at Brocade.COM]
>>Sent: Friday, August 27, 2004 3:51 PM
>>To: Jim.Coomes at seagate.com; t10 at t10.org
>>Cc: Robert Snively
>>Subject: More SBC-2 items to obsolete
>>
>>
>>* From the T10 Reflector (t10 at t10.org), posted by:
>>* "Robert Snively" <rsnively at Brocade.COM>
>>*
>>Folks,
>>
>>In the same vein,  Brocade posted either a question or
>>a statement with respect to making the following SBC-2
>>items obsolete.  These should also be considered at the
>>September meeting.
>>
>>	Question on making READ LONG obsolete.
>>	Question on making WRITE LONG obsolete.
>>
>>		As the drives become more sophisticated, the
>>		meaningfulness of the data becomes more and more
>>		difficult to interpret.  I know they will be 
>>		obsolete soon, but is the time already?
>>
>>	In FORMAT command:
>>
>>		Make bytes from index format address descriptor
>>obsolete.
>>		Make physical sector format address descriptor obsolete.
>>
>>	Invent a new condition of deprecated (~ "should not") in
>>preparation
>>	for future obsolete state and apply it to:
>>
>>		READ (6)
>>		WRITE (6)
>>
>>	Make READ DEFECT DATA command obsolete.
>>
>>	Make translate address input/output diagnostic pages obsolete.
>>
>>Some of these hypothesize that modern drives use proprietary mechanisms
>>for determining and executing defect management and that there are
>>no application clients that use these somewhat dated tools for
>>diagnosing
>>drive ECC and establishing defect lists.  If this is not true,
>>deprecating
>>READ/WRITE (6) is the only remaining question.
>>
>>*
>>* For T10 Reflector information, send a message with
>>* 'info t10' (no quotes) in the message body to majordomo at t10.org
>>
>>This email message is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential information. Any unauthorized use; review, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by return email and destroy all copies of the original message.
>>
>>Copyright  2004 MaXXan Systems, Inc. All rights reserved.
>>*
>>* 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
>
>This email message is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential information. Any unauthorized use; review, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by return email and destroy all copies of the original message.
>
>Copyright  2004 MaXXan Systems, Inc. All rights reserved.
>*
>* 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 mailing list