[T11.3] Re: FCP-3/FC-LS: Use of REC

Bob.Nixon at Emulex.Com Bob.Nixon at Emulex.Com
Thu Apr 27 10:23:58 PDT 2006

Formatted message: <A HREF="r0604273_f.htm">HTML-formatted message</A>

Hi, Dave, Emulex has no objection to obsoleting the S_ID field in the REC
   - bob
-----Original Message-----
From: t11_3-bounce at mailman.listserve.com
[mailto:t11_3-bounce at mailman.listserve.com]On Behalf Of David Peterson
Sent: Friday, April 21, 2006 10:25 AM
To: t10 at t10.org; t11_3 at t11.org
Subject: [T11.3] FCP-3/FC-LS: Use of REC
FC-LS currently specifies the Exchange originating S_ID field in the REC
payload may be different than the address identifier of the source (and
destination) of the REC. From FC-LS rev 1.2 subclause
"This ELS shall be used only for purposes specific to an FC-4. The REC (Read
Exchange Concise) Extended Link Service requests an Nx_Port to return
Exchange information for the RX_ID and OX_ID originated by the S_ID specified
in the Payload of the request Sequence. The S_ID specified in the Payload of
the request Sequence may differ from address identifiers of both the source
and destination of the REC request itself."
This (third party) capability is problematic for FC-IFR implementations,
since the information needed to perform address translation may not be known.
Does anyone have an inplementation where the REC payload Exchange originating
S_ID field does not match the S_ID in the FC Header?
(no disclaimer)

More information about the T10 mailing list