REPLACE LOST RESERVATION fixes uploaded ... again ... maybe for the last time

[岩井輝男]

* From the T10 Reflector (t10 at t10.org), posted by:
* =?UTF-8?B?5bKp5LqV6Lyd55S3?= <oteru at trendy.co.jp>
*
Ralph Weber <roweber at ieee.org>: 
>* From the T10 Reflector (t10 at t10.org), posted by:
>* Ralph Weber <roweber at ieee.org>
>*
>George,
>
>I am reasonably certain that there is a preference for successfully
>processing the REPLACE LOST RESERVATION. With this in mind, I am
>willing to consider the requested change, but only if the list
>switches from unordered to ordered.
>
>All the best,
>
>.Ralph
>
>On 7/24/2012 4:50 PM, Penokie, George wrote:
>> Ralph,
>>
>> I have looked it over. The only suggestion I have would be to change item
b) in the second a,b list from:
>>
>> b) prior to the successful processing of a PERSISTENT RESERVE OUT command
with the REPLACE LOST RESERVATION service action, the recoverable lost
persistent reservation becomes unrecoverable.
>>
>> to:
>>
>> b) the recoverable lost persistent reservation becoming unrecoverable.
>>
>> As it really matter when the reservation becomes unrecoverable. And once
the Replace Lost Reservation occurs the a,b list instance is no longer in
effect.
>>
>> Bye for now,
>> George Penokie
>>
>> LSI Corporation
>> 3033 41 St NW
>> Rochester , MN 55901
>>
>> 507-328-9017
>> george.penokie at lsi.com
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: owner-t10 at t10.org [mailto:owner-t10 at t10.org] On Behalf Of Ralph
Weber
>> Sent: Tuesday, July 24, 2012 4:18 PM
>> To: 't10 at t10.org'
>> Subject: REPLACE LOST RESERVATION fixes uploaded ... again ... maybe for
the last time
>>
>> * From the T10 Reflector (t10 at t10.org), posted by:
>> * Ralph Weber <roweber at ieee.org>
>> *
>> Based on the comments received during today's conference call,
>> I have posted a new revision of the proposal that fixes the
>> REPLACE LOST RESERVATION model.
>>
>> http://www.t10.org/cgi-bin/ac.pl?t=d&f=12-270r3.pdf
>>
>> All those present on the call were satisfied with the gist of
>> the changes (if not the details too), but several participants
>> wanted a reasonable interval to review the final product before
>> incorporation in SPC-4.
>>
>> With this in mind, my plan for making progress is as follows:
>>
>> 1) SPC-4 r36c will not include changes from 12-270; however
>> 2) the changes will be incorporated in r36d unless significant
>> .. complaints are received before Friday 3 August.
>>
>> This will give the 6 August call announced by George Penokie the
>> best possible chance to inspect the REPLACE LOST RESERVATION total
>> package in the posted SPC-4 r36d PDF file.
>>
>> 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
>>
>>
>
>
>*
>* For T10 Reflector information, send a message with
>* 'info t10' (no quotes) in the message body to 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