Subject: iSCSI-08 Comments 11 though 18

From: Thomas Dineen <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 02 Oct 2001 19:04:48 -0700

Comment 11:

Section 9.1.1 on Page 137:

"For an iSCSI Initiator, the SID values used by the session
coordinators should be configurable parameters and the SID name space
should be partitioned among the Initiator Portal Groups. This allows
each Initiator Portal Group to act independently of other portal
groups when selecting an SID for a logic; this facilitates
enforcement of the SID RULE (see 2.5.3) at the initiator."

- I do not believe "Initiator Portal Groups" as been defined. Please
define in the Architecture Section at the beginning of the document.

Comment 12:

Section 9.3 on Page 138:

"A task management command may reach the target and, in the case [where]
immediate delivery was requested, be executed before all of the tasks
it was meant to act upon have been delivered or even reached the
target."

- Please add the [where].

Comment 13:

Appendix C on page 180:

"18 RFMarkInt" and section 19

"The receiver indicates the minimum to maximum interval (in 4-byte
words) [that] the receiver wants the markers. In case the receiver wants
only a specific value, only a single value has to be specified."

- Please add the [that].

- Please add an example to this section, and section 19.

Comment 14:

Appendix c on page 181:

"19 SFMarkInt"

"Indicates at what interval (in 4-byte words) the sender [accepts,
expects] to
send the markers. The number MUST be within the range required by the
receiver. The interval is measured from the end of a marker to the
beginning of the next marker. For example, a value of 1024 means 1024
words (4096 bytes of "pure" payload between markers)."

- Please replace [accepts] with [expects].

Comment 15:

Appendix C on Page 185:

28 DataPDUInOrder

"No is used by iSCSI to indicate that the data PDUs [within sequences]
can be in any order. Yes is used to indicate that data PDUs within
sequences have to be at continuously increasing addresses and
overlays are forbidden."

- Do you really mean within sequences? I thought this refereed to the
ordering of the transfer of one sequence relative to another, and not
the PDUs within a sequence?

Comment 16:

Appendix E on Page 190:

"iSCSI addresses belonging with the same portal group tag support
spanning multiple-connection sessions across this set of addresses."

- An english problem, I would suggest a rewording.

Comment 17:

Appendix F on page 192:

"This clause defines the alias entry formats and codes used in these
commands to designate iSCSI devices or ports. As noted in 1.1, the
protocol identifier used in these formats shall be set to 0x05 (see
[SPC3]) and the format code values are defined in the following
table:"

- The IEEE uses the term clause, do we really want to use it in this
context?
I would suggest replacing [clause] with [Appendix].

Comment 18:

- The numbering of the sections seem to increase across all appendices.
I would suggest renumbering of the sections local to each appendix.

---

From: "Julian Satran" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 4 Oct 2001 16:04:33 +0300

Comments in text - Thanks, Julo

Thomas Dineen <[email-masked]>
Sent by: [email-masked]
03-10-01 04:04
Please respond to Thomas Dineen

        To:     [email-masked], Thomas Dineen <[email-masked]>
        cc: 
        Subject:        iSCSI-08 Comments 11 though 18

Comment 11:

+++ See 2.5.1 +++

Comment 12:

Section 9.3 on Page 138:

+++ will fix +++

Comment 13:

Appendix C on page 180:

- Please add the [that].

+++ will fix +++

Comment 14:

Appendix c on page 181:

"19 SFMarkInt"

+++ I think the word can be "agrees" +++

Comment 15:

Appendix C on Page 185:

28 DataPDUInOrder

+++ That is within sequence +++

Comment 16:

Appendix E on Page 190:

+++
I will attempt the following wording:

Multiple-connection sessions can span iSCSI addresses belonging to the 
same portal group.

Multiple-connection sessions cannot span iSCSI addresses belonging to 
different portal groups.

++++
Comment 17:

Appendix F on page 192:

+++ will fix +++

Comment 18:

+++ as soon as I get to a better tool (on 09)+++

---

From: "Julian Satran" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 4 Oct 2001 16:04:53 +0300

-

Comment 11:

+++ See 2.5.1 +++

Comment 12:

Section 9.3 on Page 138:

+++ will fix +++

Comment 13:

Appendix C on page 180:

- Please add the [that].

+++ will fix +++

Comment 14:

Appendix c on page 181:

"19 SFMarkInt"

Comment 15:

Appendix C on Page 185:

28 DataPDUInOrder

Comment 16:

Appendix E on Page 190:

+++

++++
Comment 17:

Appendix F on page 192:

+++ will fix +++

Comment 18: