re. Concerns about SCSI-3

dallas at dallas at
Wed May 1 15:18:33 PDT 1996

* From the SCSI Reflector, posted by:
* dallas at

What I propose is to start discussion of the issues
be email.  This can be accomplished on this reflector 
or I can start a separate reflector based upon the 
wants of the participants.

If needed, I can arrange a series of conference calls, meetings
or both.  The conference calls/meetings should only occur after 
a general consensus is reached by the software implementors.

I do not think a discussion of the SCSI-3 specs is warranted as
the first order of business.  What I would like is a discussion
of the logical functionality that the software implementors need
|from the SCSI-3 transports.

Once we have the needed logical functionality then we can start
examining/discussing the specs. 


------- Replied-To Message

Date: Tue, 30 Apr 96 19:12:53 EDT
From: at (Hallam, Ken MV)
  To: SCSI Reflector <SCSI at>
Subj: re. Concerns about SCSI-3

* From the SCSI Reflector, posted by:
* "Hallam, Ken                 MV" <KHallam at>

I agree with Bill Dallas' short summation of potential problems with mapping 
parallel SCSI behavior onto a serial interconnect. Internally within Unisys 
I have an education problem in getting people to understand that parallel 
SCSI code cannot be mapped blindly over to serial Fibre Channel. None of our 
implementations in parallel SCSI have implemented ACA as yet and most were 
not planning to add it for the serial interface conversion. It will be a 
requirement for any serial SCSI implementation, but very few people outside 
of the standards development community have even become aware of its 
existance yet.

OK Bill, you got my attention. Now what do we do?

Ken Hallam
ken.hallam at

% ====== Internet headers and postmarks (see DECWRL::GATEWAY.DOC) ======
% Received: from by (5.65/rmc-22feb94) id
   AA25968; Tue, 30 Apr 96 19:04:38 -040
% Received: from by (5.65v3.2/1.0/WV) id 
  AA27932; Tue, 30 Apr 1996 19:03:36 -040
% Received: (from root at localhost) by ( id QAA0
  3212; Tue, 30 Apr 1996 16:57:10 -0600
% Received: from by via
   smap (V1.3) id smaa03181; Tue Apr 30 16:56:42 199
% Received: (from majordom at localhost) by Symbios.COM ( id QAA0189
  8 for scsi-outgoing; Tue, 30 Apr 1996 16:55:10 -0600
% Received: from ([]) by Symbios.COM (
  .6.6) with ESMTP id QAA01892 for <SCSI at>; Tue, 30 Apr 1996 16:55:0
  7 -0600
% Received: (from root at localhost) by ( id QAA0
  2963 for <SCSI at>; Tue, 30 Apr 1996 16:55:08 -0600
% Received: from by via sm
  ap (V1.3) id sma002936; Tue Apr 30 16:54:51 199
% Received: from ( []) b
  y (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id WAA12543 for <SCSI at symbios.c
  om>; Tue, 30 Apr 1996 22:54:51 GMT
% Received: from ([]) by (4.
  1/SMI-4.1-1.8) id AA04992; Tue, 30 Apr 96 23:05:31 GM
% Received: by with Microsoft Mail id <31869ADB at
  .com>; Tue, 30 Apr 96 15:57:31 PD
% From: "Hallam, Ken                 MV" <KHallam at>
% To: SCSI Reflector <SCSI at>
% Subject: re. Concerns about SCSI-3
% Date: Tue, 30 Apr 96 15:54:00 PDT
% Message-Id: <31869ADB at>
% Encoding: 16 TEXT
% X-Mailer: Microsoft Mail V3.0
% Sender: owner-scsi at
% Precedence: bulk

------- End of Replied-To Message

More information about the T10 mailing list