Name that multi-port SCSI device

Bob Snively bob.snively at ebay.sun.com
Mon May 24 08:34:05 PDT 1999


* From the T10 Reflector (t10 at symbios.com), posted by:
* Bob Snively <bob.snively at ebay.sun.com>
*

------------- Begin Forwarded Message -------------

Date: Thu, 20 May 1999 13:17:32 -0700 (PDT)
From: Bob Snively <snively at ha10nwk>
Subject: Re: Name that multi-port SCSI device
To: roweber at acm.org
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-MD5: 7aY4Vmp789Ok2gJFlGjRhA==


Ralph,

I was playing with this for a few moments and thought about what we
were really trying to express.

The concept is that a LUN has more than one connectivity nexus available to
it.  That connectivity nexus is an IT nexus.  Task queues are maintained
by logical unit, not by target.  The only target oriented activity is
the occassional mode-select associated with path capabilities.
Proper names might then be:
	
	SCSI multiple connection logical unit 
		This becomes SMCLU pronounced smuckloo.
		
	Multiple Connection Logical Unit (since LU is already SCSI)
		This becomes MCLU pronounced muckloo.
		
	Multi-path Logical Unit 
		This becomes MPLU pronounced muploo, or MLU pronounced Emloo
		
The basic defect with the SCSI "device" concept is that a SCSI device is
a rather arbitrary box that shows SCSI target and/or initiator behavior at
one or more of its multiple ports and presumably has enough concept of
LU to answer INQUIRY and REPORT LUNS.

You are free to post this or call me at 510-574-9051.

Bob
		
					
	

> Date: Wed, 19 May 1999 08:57:26 -0400 (EDT)
> To: -T10 Reflector <T10 at Symbios.COM>
> Subject: Name that multi-port SCSI device
> From: "Ralph O. Weber" <ralphoweber at csi.com>
> MIME-Version: 1.0
> 
> * From the T10 Reflector (t10 at symbios.com), posted by:
> * "Ralph O. Weber" <ralphoweber at csi.com>
> *
> Several meetings ago, I was asked to devise a name to replace 
> 'multi-port SCSI device' in SAM-2.  My understanding is that
> 'multi-port SCSI device' is too much like 'SCSI device',
> which is exactly the thing that a 'multi-port SCSI device'
> is not.  That is, the whole point of having a name for a 
> 'multi-port SCSI device' is so that it can be compared to
> and differentiated from a 'SCSI device'.
> 
> This message solicits opinions regarding the new name.
> I'll offer some ideas, but don't feel limited to just
> those suggestions.
> 
> One question is, should the name start with SCSI, i.e.,
> SCSI multi-port xyz, or just multi-port xyz?  I'm leaning
> slightly toward SCSI multi-port xyz.
> 
> Beyond that, here are some new names generated with the
> help of my favorite text editor's thesaurus.  When thinking
> about these and other possibilities, don't forget the 
> option of making an acronym for the name.
> 
> multi-port mechanism
> multi-port apparatus
> multi-port unit
> multi-port component
> multi-port module
> multi-port instrument
> multi-port appliance
> multi-port equipment
> 
> Please respond to the reflector (or me privately) with 
> preferences or additional suggestions.  Don't forget
> the SCSI xyz or not question.
> 
> Thanks.
> 
> Ralph...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *
> * For T10 Reflector information, send a message with
> * 'info t10' (no quotes) in the message body to majordomo at symbios.com


------------- End Forwarded Message -------------


*
* For T10 Reflector information, send a message with
* 'info t10' (no quotes) in the message body to majordomo at symbios.com





More information about the T10 mailing list