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

[Kevin D Butt]

Formatted message: <a href="http://www.t10.org/cgi-bin/ac.pl?t=r&f=r1207251_f.htm">HTML-formatted message</a>

I concur with George.  If what he is saying is not correct, then I do not 
understand the current text either.
Thanks,
Kevin D. Butt
SCSI & Fibre Channel Architect, Tape Firmware
Data Protection & Retention
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:	"Penokie, George" <George.Penokie at lsi.com>
To:	Ralph Weber <roweber at ieee.org>, 
Cc:	"'t10 at t10.org'" <t10 at t10.org>
Date:	07/25/2012 06:58 AM
Subject:	RE: REPLACE LOST RESERVATION fixes uploaded ... again ... 
maybe for the last time
Sent by:	owner-t10 at t10.org
* From the T10 Reflector (t10 at t10.org), posted by:
* "Penokie, George" <George.Penokie at lsi.com>
*
Ralph,
Your suggestion to make it an ordered list does not make sense to me. The 
list is a list of conditions that would cause the device server to clear 
the recoverable lost persistent reservation condition. There are two ways 
the condition may be cleared. 
One way is for the Replace Lost Reservation to command to succeed. 
The other way is if for some vendor specific reason the device server 
determines that the recoverable lost persistent reservation becomes 
unrecoverable. If that happens no command will get the reservation back.
Those are the two options and either option could happen first. If that is 
not case then I am not understanding the text as currently written. 
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 4:54 PM
Cc: 't10 at t10.org'
Subject: Re: 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>
*
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