18-month-old discrepancy in SPC-4

Ralph Weber roweber at IEEE.org
Tue Oct 12 14:30:57 PDT 2010


* From the T10 Reflector (t10 at t10.org), posted by:
* Ralph Weber <roweber at ieee.org>
*
  So that a recorded decision can be made in Orlando regarding
the problem discussed below, I have uploaded a formal proposal:
http://www.t10.org/cgi-bin/ac.pl?t=d&f=10-322r0.pdf
All the best,
.Ralph
On 9/23/2010 3:21 PM, Paul Suhler wrote:
> Quantum requests that we stick with the speciffication in SPC-4.
> Paul
>
*____________________________________________________________________________
_________________________* 
>
> Paul A. Suhler | Firmware Engineer | Quantum Corporation | Office: 
> 949.856.7748 | _paul.suhler at quantum.com_ 
> *Preserving the World's Most Important Data. Yours.™*
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *From:* owner-t10 at t10.org [mailto:owner-t10 at t10.org] *On Behalf Of 
> *Ballard, Curtis C (StorageWorks)
> *Sent:* Thursday, September 23, 2010 11:36 AM
> *To:* Kevin D Butt; Gerry Houlder
> *Cc:* owner-t10 at t10.org; T10 Reflector
> *Subject:* RE: 18-month-old discrepancy in SPC-4
>
> HP also requests that the parameters as specified in SPC-4 be retained.
>
> Curtis Ballard
>
> Hewlett Packard
>
> StorageWorks Division
>
> Fort Collins, CO
>
> (970) 898-3013
>
> *From:* owner-t10 at t10.org [mailto:owner-t10 at t10.org] *On Behalf Of 
> *Kevin D Butt
> *Sent:* Thursday, September 23, 2010 10:50 AM
> *To:* Gerry Houlder
> *Cc:* owner-t10 at t10.org; T10 Reflector
> *Subject:* Re: 18-month-old discrepancy in SPC-4
>
> My company implemented the Power Transitions Log Page as specified in 
> SPC-4.
>
> Kevin D. Butt
> SCSI & Fibre Channel Architect, Tape Firmware
> MS 6TYA, 9000 S. Rita Rd., Tucson, AZ 85744
> Tel: 520-799-5280
> Fax: 520-799-2723 (T/L:321)
> Email address: kdbutt at us.ibm.com
> http://www-03.ibm.com/servers/storage/
>
>
>
> From: Gerry Houlder <gerry.houlder at seagate.com>
> To: T10 Reflector <t10 at t10.org>
> Date: 09/23/2010 08:40 AM
> Subject: Re: 18-month-old discrepancy in SPC-4
> Sent by: owner-t10 at t10.org
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
>
> I believe the parameter codes must be restored to the values that were 
> in the accepted proposal. My company implemented those values based on 
> its acceptance by the T10 group. I apologize for not noticing the 
> editorial error earlier, but if you want the parameters changed to 1 
> through 4 then a new proposal should be required.
>
> On Wed, Sep 22, 2010 at 6:53 PM, Kevin D Butt <kdbutt at us.ibm.com 
> > wrote:
> I don't believe those log parameters existed before so the first time 
> they exist is in the SPC-4 version that first introduced them. Given 
> this, I vote to leave them the way they were posted - especially since 
> we have since had two different version descriptors assigned with 
> these values.
>
> Kevin D. Butt
> SCSI & Fibre Channel Architect, Tape Firmware
> MS 6TYA, 9000 S. Rita Rd., Tucson, AZ 85744
> Tel: 520-799-5280
> Fax: 520-799-2723 (T/L:321)
> Email address: kdbutt at us.ibm.com _
> _http://www-03.ibm.com/servers/storage/
>
>
>
> From: Ralph Weber <roweber at IEEE.org>
> To: "'t10 at t10.org <mailto:t10 at t10.org>'" <t10 at t10.org 
> <mailto:t10 at t10.org>>
> Date: 09/22/2010 04:44 PM
> Subject: 18-month-old discrepancy in SPC-4
> Sent by: owner-t10 at t10.org <mailto:owner-t10 at t10.org>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
>
>
> * From the T10 Reflector (t10 at t10.org <mailto:t10 at t10.org>), posted by:
> * Ralph Weber <roweber at ieee.org >
> *
> In February 2009 (last year), Gerry Houlder's 09-054r1
> was approved (8:0:10) for incorporation in SPC-4. When
> the document was incorporated, the proposed Log Parameter
> Code values of 0--3 were incremented by one (i.e., 1--4
> were incorporated instead of the proposed values) in
> SPC-4 r18.
> _
> _http://www.t10.org/cgi-bin/ac.pl?t=d&f=09-054r1.pdf 
> <http://www.t10.org/cgi-bin/ac.pl?t=d&f=09-054r1.pdf&gt;
> _
> _http://www.t10.org/cgi-bin/ac.pl?t=f&f=spc4r18.pdf 
> <http://www.t10.org/cgi-bin/ac.pl?t=f&f=spc4r18.pdf&gt;
>
> Since I cannot find an explanation or justification for
> this change, it must be considered an editorial mistake.
>
> The question now is a little complex. Do we leave the
> codes the way they were posted ... or ... do I fix them
> as part of incorporating 09-360r9?
>
> A related point is that Version Descriptors have been
> assigned to SPC-4 r18 and SPC-4 r23. How this affects
> the choice is in the eye of the beholder.
>
> All the best,
>
> .Ralph
> *
> * For T10 Reflector information, send a message with
> * 'info t10' (no quotes) in the message body to majordomo at t10.org 
> <mailto:majordomo at t10.org>
>
*
* 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