FCP-4: Letter Ballot Comment HPQ-219
Frederick.Knight at netapp.com
Fri Oct 29 11:55:25 PDT 2010
Formatted message: <a href="http://www.t10.org/cgi-bin/ac.pl?t=r&f=r1010291_f.htm">HTML-formatted message</a>
I tend to agree that it's pretty late for a new SHALL.
From: Bob.Nixon at emulex.com [mailto:Bob.Nixon at emulex.com]
Sent: Thursday, October 28, 2010 5:17 PM
To: dpeterso at brocade.com; t10 at t10.org
Subject: RE: FCP-4: Letter Ballot Comment HPQ-219
In the first added paragraph, "...the Platform Name shall be the same as
the SCSI device name" raises a good idea, but adds a new "shall" too
late in the game for my taste. Platform Name has never been mentioned
in FCP before. I would be happy with a "should".
The long discussion of names reported by virtualized OSs leaves me
confused on a couple points:
1. It specifically relates to names "reported through all the SCSI
initiator ports". A Target has a VPD page, but how does an initiator
report its name?
2. Is there a change being suggested for FCP-4?
From: owner-t10 at t10.org [mailto:owner-t10 at t10.org] On Behalf Of David
Sent: Thursday, October 28, 2010 1:18 PM
To: t10 at t10.org
Subject: FCP-4: Letter Ballot Comment HPQ-219
At 9.93 in down and 0.41 in over
"Each FCP device should include a SCSI device name in NAA IEEE
Registered format (see SPC-4). If the FCP device includes a Platform
Name (see FC-GS-6), then the Platform Name shall be the same as the SCSI
In the Device Identification VPD page, a device server in an FCP target
device that implements a SCSI device name:
a) shall report the SCSI device name in binary NAA format; and
b) should report the SCSI device name in SCSI name string format (e.g.,
"naa." followed by 16 hexadecimal digits followed by 4 ASCII null
Also add this to the SAM-5 names & identifiers annex (IEEE Registered
format, 8 bytes).
SAM-4 allows a transport protocol to mandate implementing device names
and define their format.
Node names were never well defined in FC, always unclear whether they
named a Port, an HBA (a set of Ports on the same card), or a system (set
of cards in a system). They are thus worthless.
Platform name supposedly provides clearer guidance, identifying the
entire system - the same scope as a SCSI device name.
With NPIV and server virtualization gaining popularity, it would be
helpful to have a unique identifier for each operating system instance,
reported through all the SCSI initiator ports (whether NPIV or physical)
that the operating system uses. If the operating system instance is shut
down and restarted on a different physical machine, that identifier
should move with it. This identifier should even work if the operating
system has access to a mix of protocols - e.g. some FCP ports, some
iSCSI ports, and some SAS ports. The same NAA IEEE Registered identifier
can be reported and used in FCP (both binary and as a "naa." string) ,
SAS (both binary and as a "naa." string) and iSCSI (as a "naa." string).
A system that doesn't have iSCSI ports could just report the binary NAA
The device name would be helpful for configuring V-SANs, zoning, SCSI
access controls, etc. For example, the system administrator could grant
certain zoning permissions to an operating system instance, no matter
which physical machine it happens to be running on and which ports it
happens to be using.
I have no problem with adding accepting this comment. Please respond
with any objections along with your reasoning asap.
Note I plan to move to accept the letter ballot comments at November T10
and will have the comments and draft standard uploaded shortly. There
will be one comment open from my perspective and that comment is on the
Also please consider the need/desire for a second letter ballot on
More information about the T10