FCP-2 recovery problem

Matt Wakeley matt_wakeley at agilent.com
Mon Jun 26 10:40:29 PDT 2000

* From the T10 Reflector (t10 at t10.org), posted by:
* Matt Wakeley <matt_wakeley at agilent.com>

"David A. Peterson" wrote:

> Howdy All,
> Finally catching up on emails.
> Charles proposal is exactly what I was thinking also. In my reading of
> the CRN text in FCP-2 today, it does not explicitly state the CRN is
> based on the I_T_L nexus, but the EPDC bit is contained in the lun
> control mode page, so I guess it is implied. Would be nice to see some
> text stating this.
> Anyways, I think the proposal would work if the CRN is based on the
> I_T_L
> nexus (i.e. not I_T nexus).

Having CRN based on I_T_L nexus is exactly the wrong thing to do.  That would
require the lowest level part of the initiator driver to have knowledge (and
storage) for all possible LUs in a target.  Say a target had 10,000 LUs.
That's a lot of CRNs the lowest part of the driver would have to keep track
of... plus, how does it know about them?  SCSI is the layer that performs LU
discovery.  See my email titled "FCP-2: Command reference per LUN????"


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

More information about the T10 mailing list