SES-1 v. SES-2 clarification

Elliott, Robert (Server Storage) elliott at hp.com
Mon Jul 19 16:06:31 PDT 2004


* From the T10 Reflector (t10 at t10.org), posted by:
* "Elliott, Robert (Server Storage)" <elliott at hp.com>
*
No change to the meaning was intended.  It's only confusing if you read
"capable of transporting" as "capable of successfully transporting"
rather than "capable of trying to transport."

How about replacing the sentence with:
Such a device server shall set the encserv (enclosure services) bit to
one in the standard INQUIRY data (see SPC-3) to indicate that it
supports an attached enclosure services process, which may or may not be
currently attached.

--
Rob Elliott, elliott at hp.com
Hewlett-Packard Industry Standard Server Storage Advanced Technology
https://ecardfile.com/id/RobElliott




> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-t10 at t10.org [mailto:owner-t10 at t10.org] On Behalf 
> Of Rich Ramos
> Sent: Friday, July 16, 2004 8:31 PM
> To: t10 at t10.org
> Subject: Re: SES-1 v. SES-2 clarification
> 
> 
> * From the T10 Reflector (t10 at t10.org), posted by:
> * Rich Ramos <t10 at RichRamos.com>
> *
> 
> I asked Rob Elliott at the meetings this week about this and he 
> didn't seem to sure about how the change came about either.  So I'm 
> hoping someone else out there can shed light on this.  Is this a 
> clarification between v1 and v2 or is this a functional change?
> 
> let's look at a little more of the paragraphs in question, to me it 
> seems like it can be read either way.
> 
> v1, Section 4.1.2 on "Access through non-enclosure services device"
> Such devices shall use the same SEND DIAGNOSTIC and RECEIVE 
> DIAGNOSTIC RESULTS commands and page formats used by an enclosure 
> services device, but otherwise support the device model specified by 
> their peripheral device type value. SCSI device servers set the 
> enclosure services bit (ENCSERV) in the standard INQUIRY data (see 
> ANSI X3.301) to indicate that they are capable of transporting 
> enclosure services information if an enclosure services process is 
> connected to the device. An application client determines that an 
> enclosure services process is actually connected to the device by 
> using the RECEIVE DIAGNOSTIC RESULTS command to request a 
> configuration page. If the SCSI device is not able to communicate 
> with an enclosure services process, a CHECK CONDITION status is 
> returned and the sense data is set appropriately
> 
> v2: Section 4.1.3 on "Attached enclosure services process"
> Such devices shall use the same SEND DIAGNOSTIC and RECEIVE 
> DIAGNOSTIC RESULTS commands and  page formats used by an enclosure 
> services device, but otherwise support the device model specified by 
> their  peripheral device type value. SCSI device servers set the 
> ENCSERV (enclosure services) bit in the standard  INQUIRY data (see 
> SPC-3) to indicate that they are capable of transporting enclosure 
> services information to an  attached enclosure services process. An 
> application client determines that an enclosure services process is 
> actually attached to the device by using the RECEIVE DIAGNOSTIC 
> RESULTS command to request a  Configuration diagnostic page (see 
> 6.1.2). If the SCSI device is not able to communicate with an 
> enclosure  services process, a CHECK CONDITION status is returned and 
> the sense data is set appropriately.
> 
> 
> It's this one part of the sentence that seems to make all the 
> difference:
> "if an enclosure services process is connected to the device."
> 
> Does anyone know why this sentence was changed?
> 
> -Rich
> 
> 
> --- Original ---
> From: Rich Ramos <t10 at RichRamos.com>
> To: t10 at t10.org
> Date: 7/6/04 11:22 AM -0700
> Subject: SES-1 v. SES-2 clarification
> 
> * From the T10 Reflector (t10 at t10.org), posted by:
> * Rich Ramos <t10 at RichRamos.com>
> *
> 
> I'm trying to figure out if some wording change between SES-1 and
> SES-2 was a change in function or just a clarification.  In section
> 4.1.2 in SES-1, which is section 4.1.3 in SES-2, it more or less
> says all the same thing except the following sentence:
> 
> SES-1:
> SCSI device servers set the enclosure services bit (ENCSERV) in the
> standard INQUIRY data (see ANSI X3.301) to indicate that they are
> capable of transporting enclosure services information if an
> enclosure services process is connected to the device.
> 
> SES-2:
> SCSI device servers set the ENCSERV (enclosure services) bit in the
> standard  INQUIRY data (see SPC-3) to indicate that they are
> capable of transporting enclosure services information to an
> attached enclosure services process.
> 
> 
> The wording in SES-1 would seem to allow implementations of devices
> that are capable of Enclosure Services but that if they don't
> actually have an encserv process attached that they won't set the
> EncServ bit.  The wording in SES-2 seems to remove this allowance.
> Do people agree that the wording in SES-1 allows for such a case or
> not?  If so, then this would be a functional change between 1 and
> 2, correct?
> 
> -Rich
> *
> * 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
> 
*
* 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