comment on 06-369r2 -- Security Association Model for SPC-4

Gerry.Houlder at seagate.com Gerry.Houlder at seagate.com
Fri Aug 25 12:44:23 PDT 2006


* From the T10 Reflector (t10 at t10.org), posted by:
* Gerry.Houlder at seagate.com
*
While reading through the new section 5.13, I thought the information was
not organized in the best order for understanding. 5.13.1 and 5.13.2
introduce tables without describing what they are for. Clause 5.13.3
finally starts defining a "security association" and what it is used for.
This should become the first clause in 5.13 because it provides a basis for
understanding the stuff in the other clauses.
It is also unclear if this security association method is required for all
"security protocols" supported in SECURITY PROTOCOL IN/ OUT commands or
just the tape protocol (which is the only one described in SPC-4 at the
moment).
I would like to see a more generic model that starts with material from
5.13.1,5.13.3, and 5.13.4; then moves on to describe the choices made for
the minimum SA parameters, etc. for the tape protocol. It should also state
that the tape protocol details do not necessarily apply to protocols that
reference other documents for their description.
*
* 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