Name that multi-port SCSI device

briandm at briandm at
Wed Jun 2 13:48:23 PDT 1999

* From the T10 Reflector (t10 at, posted by:
* briandm at

I think we're there.
Thanks for your patience.
You're right.  I did not see before that X and Xa were not the same logical
unit.  (Does the "a" in "Xa" have anything to do with "Port a"?)

I like your model better than mine.
(BTW The target in my model is not defined by physical hardware but by
shared Logical Units -- all LUs shared between (among?) ports belong to the
same target, regardless of which LUs are attached to which port).

I do have an issue with this statement from your last note:
On Sat, 29 May 1999 11:19:24 -0400, George M. Ericson wrote:
> ...
> So, one can stay within the boudaries of SAM-2.8 and yet still describe
> of the complex relationships between ports and LUs on a controller that
> been asked for.
> ...
I don't think the relationship between X and Xa was described in SAM-2.8 or
any other standard.

---- Do we now need two new names, one for the multi-ported target Tab(X,Y)
and one for relationship between LU Xa and LU X associated with different

Aside from the names, here's what I'd like to see addressed:
(1) I would like to have the option to treat Tab(X,Y) as either a single
target: Tab(X,Y) or two targets: Ta(X,Y) and Tb(Xa, Ya) (e.g. have a
TARGET_RESET on Ta not interrupt I/O on Tb).  (I think this is the issue
Gene referred to).

(2) For two targets Ta(X,Y) and Tb(Xa,Z) I'd like to be able to have LUs X
and Xa look like the same LU --- exactly the same as LU X in Tab(X).


Brian McKean                             Voice: (303)381-4246 
Mylex Corporation External Products      Fax:   (303)413-0464 
4900 Pearl East Circle Suite 104         brian at 
Boulder, CO 80301-6108 

Get your free, private email at
* For T10 Reflector information, send a message with
* 'info t10' (no quotes) in the message body to majordomo at

More information about the T10 mailing list