Invalid value in SERVICE ACTION field

[Ralph Weber]

* From the T10 Reflector (t10 at t10.org), posted by:
* Ralph Weber <Ralph.Weber at wdc.com>
*
While I am fully sympathetic with the "messy" nature of an error reporting
scheme that has grown over the years, people will be making Snow Castles on
the streets of Houston in July before the suggested changes are made in SPC-5
based solely on a T10 Reflector posting.
FWIW I am more that ready to be entertained by the CAP response to a written
proposal along the lines suggested here. However, I am not willing to be the
source of that entertainment as the author of such an unequivocal object for
CAP gunnery practice.
________________________________________
From: owner-t10 at t10.org [owner-t10 at t10.org] on behalf of Douglas Gilbert
[dgilbert at interlog.com]
Sent: Monday, April 28, 2014 5:28 PM
To: T10 Reflector (t10 at t10.org)
Subject: RE: Invalid value in SERVICE ACTION field
* From the T10 Reflector (t10 at t10.org), posted by:
* Douglas Gilbert <dgilbert at interlog.com>
*
Irrespective of what SPC-4 says, from the point of view
of an OS or user space tools, this is just a mess.
I'd reckon about 80% of devices get the illogical "right"
answer (invalid field in cdb), 15% get the logical "wrong"
answer, and as for the rest well that depends on which
command you send :-)
A suggestion: for SPC-5 deprecate INVALID COMMAND OPERATION
CODE and the use of INVALID FIELD IN CDB for service actions.
Then introduce a new additional sense for both cases: for
example "COMMAND NOT SUPPORTED".
Doug Gilbert
*
* 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