Comment on 14-150r0

Kevin D Butt kdbutt at us.ibm.com
Tue Jun 10 13:14:38 PDT 2014


Formatted message: <a href="http://www.t10.org/cgi-bin/ac.pl?t=r&f=r1406102_f.htm">HTML-formatted message</a>

Bill,
Please change the "shall" to a "may"
As for the additional sense code, I prefer COMMAND SEQUENCE ERROR.  My 
reasoning is that when many of the ISV's that use my devices calim that 
"INVALID FIELD IN CDB" is treated as though that field is never a valid 
field to use on this device (at least with this code level).
Thanks,
Kevin D. Butt
SCSI Architect, Tape Firmware, T10 Standards
Data Protection & Retention
MS 6TYA, 9000 S. Rita Rd., Tucson, AZ 85744
Tel: 520-799-5280
Fax: 520-799-2723 (T/L:321)
Email address: kdbutt at us.ibm.com
http://www-03.ibm.com/servers/storage/ 
From:	Gerry Houlder <gerry.houlder at seagate.com>
To:	T10 Reflector <t10 at t10.org>, 
Date:	06/10/2014 12:52 PM
Subject:	Comment on 14-150r0
Sent by:	<owner-t10 at t10.org>
Hi,
Seagate would prefer the sense data for the situation in this proposal to 
be INVALID FIELD IN CDB instead of COMMAND SEQUENCE ERROR. Seagate uses 
INVALID FIELD IN CDB for this situation.



More information about the T10 mailing list