[T11.3] FC-DA-2: table 35 - ACC Response code = "Command executed"

Bob.Nixon at Emulex.Com Bob.Nixon at Emulex.Com
Thu Apr 10 08:49:09 PDT 2008


Formatted message: <A HREF="r0804103_f.htm">HTML-formatted message</A>

I'm easy...rip it out	8-)
While you're at it, rip out the line above ("PRLI Common Service
Parareters"). You already moved it into table 34, which I think we
agreed at the last meeting.
   - bob
  _____  
From: David Peterson [mailto:dpeterso at Brocade.COM] 
Sent: Thursday, April 10, 2008 8:32 AM
To: Nixon, Bob; t11_3 at t11.org; t10 at t10.org
Subject: RE: [T11.3] FC-DA-2: table 35 - ACC Response code = "Command
executed"
Howdy Bob,
I disagree with stating the obvious. The row is misleading and again
provides no value.
FCP already states: An accept response code indicating other than
REQUEST EXECUTED (see 6.3.5 and FC-LS) shall be provided if the PRLI ELS
FCP Service Parameter page is incorrect or if a requested image pair is
not established. 
...Dave
  _____  
From: Bob.Nixon at Emulex.Com [mailto:Bob.Nixon at Emulex.Com] 
Sent: Wednesday, April 09, 2008 5:11 PM
To: David Peterson; t11_3 at t11.org; t10 at t10.org
Subject: RE: [T11.3] FC-DA-2: table 35 - ACC Response code = "Command
executed"
Hi, Dave, I think what that row is trying to say is that a Target has to
be able to give that response (if it couldn't, it could not be a
Target). Other responses are not sepcifically prohibited by that line,
although it could be read that way. I would suggest adding another row:
ACC Response code != "Command executed":   -	 A     P    -
   - bob
  _____  
From: t11_3-bounces at listserve.com [mailto:t11_3-bounces at listserve.com]
On Behalf Of David Peterson
Sent: Wednesday, April 09, 2008 11:49 AM
To: t11_3 at t11.org; t10 at t10.org
Subject: [T11.3] FC-DA-2: table 35 - ACC Response code = "Command
executed"
FC-DA-2 table 35 has a row specifying an ACC Response code = "Command
executed" is a Required PRLI response from an FCP target.
Other responses are certainly possible (see FCP-4) thus I believe this
is wrong (and actually mislabeled) and provides no real value either.
I propose that the row be removed.
Comments?
...Dave



More information about the T10 mailing list