SSC-3: IBM LB comments clarified (IBM-L3)

Kevin D Butt kdbutt at
Thu Aug 21 12:26:17 PDT 2008

Formatted message: <A HREF="r0808211_f.htm">HTML-formatted message</A>

As part  of my action item to review IBM LB comments to ensure there is 
enough information to determine to what text the comments apply, I am 
going through the commented pdf comment by comment.  I have turned on 
track changes in 08-095r4.xls and will upload it as a document when 
I found that the following comment was lost in the conversion to text. 
Please add this as IBM-L3
{Begin IBM-L3}
3.1.56 reservation loss:
An event caused by the release of a reserve/release method reservation 
(see SPC-2) or by the transition within the device server from the state 
where a persistent reservation holder exists to the state where a 
persistent reservation holder does not exist (see SPC-4).
Comment 1: add:
A preempt of a reservation is not considered a reservation loss if a new 
reservation is created as part of that preempt.  <<to distinguish between 
Comment 2: Shouldn't this state where one of the reservation participants 
no longer is a part of the reservation?  I am thinking of the case where a 
CORL is set and a single initiator from an RO type of persistent 
reservation is preempted.
There seems to be a hole in the clear on reservation loss vs. clear on 
reservation preempt.
{End IBM-L3}
Kevin D. Butt
SCSI & Fibre Channel Architect, Tape Firmware
MS 6TYA, 9000 S. Rita Rd., Tucson, AZ 85744
Tel: 520-799-2869 / 520-799-5280
Fax: 520-799-2723 (T/L:321)
Email address: kdbutt at

More information about the T10 mailing list