FW: Resolution of comment on temporary initiators (resend for bo

Robert Snively rsnively at Brocade.COM
Thu May 11 15:47:04 PDT 2000

* From the T10 Reflector (t10 at t10.org), posted by:
* Robert Snively <rsnively at Brocade.COM>
-----Original Message-----
From: Robert Snively [mailto:rsnively at Brocade.COM]
Sent: Thursday, May 11, 2000 11:43 AM
To: t10 at t10.org; fc at network.com
Subject: Resolution of comment on temporary initiators

* From the fc reflector, posted by:
* Robert Snively <rsnively at Brocade.COM>
I have put the following text into the latest revision of the comment
response document for FCP-2 (note yet posted).  Any complaints?

FC-MI multi-initiator resolution (Technical)

    Section TBD:
	Some devices attempting to participate in a multi-initiator reject
	if both the initiator and target bits are set.  This is wrong. Some
	devices may also reject the presence of any other initiator.

	This needs to be checked in FCP-2. The particular issue is whether
	or not FCP-2 has been explicit in the requirements for supporting
	multi-initiator operation and temporary initiator operation.

	FCP-2 will discuss it further, and, if any changes are required
	to FCP-2 or to FC-MI, a proposal will be presented.

	Section explicitly requires the setting of both
	bits 4 and 5 to be allowed. This was also true in FCP,
	clause The devices not meeting this requirement
	are not compliant with FCP or with FCP-2.

	The present revision of FC-MI does not address this question.
	There does not appear to be any test in SANMark that specifically
	verifies this capability or justifies this failure.

	No change is required.

Bob Snively
Brocade Communications           Phone  408 487 8135
1901 Guadalupe Parkway
San Jose, CA 95131               Email   rsnively at brocade.com 

* 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