Return-Path: X-Sieve: cmu-sieve 2.0 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by ece.cmu.edu (8.11.0/8.10.2) id h1CJZRS15149 for ips-outgoing; Wed, 12 Feb 2003 14:35:27 -0500 (EST) X-Authentication-Warning: ece.cmu.edu: majordom set sender to owner-ips@ece.cmu.edu using -f Received: from palrel12.hp.com (palrel12.hp.com [156.153.255.237]) by ece.cmu.edu (8.11.0/8.10.2) with ESMTP id h1CJZKW15136 for ; Wed, 12 Feb 2003 14:35:24 -0500 (EST) Received: from rosemail.rose.hp.com (rosemail.rose.hp.com [15.96.64.26]) by palrel12.hp.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 39B661C00C4F; Wed, 12 Feb 2003 11:35:08 -0800 (PST) Received: from swathi (atl1nai177079.ssr.hp.com [15.228.177.79]) by rosemail.rose.hp.com with SMTP (8.7.1/8.7.3 SMKit7.02) id LAA10249; Wed, 12 Feb 2003 11:35:02 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <00e901c2d2cd$d713e890$2cb2e40f@rose.hp.com> From: "Mallikarjun C." To: "Bob Braden" , , Cc: , References: <200302112348.XAA03474@gra.isi.edu> Subject: Re: Protocol Action: iSCSI to Proposed Standard Date: Wed, 12 Feb 2003 10:24:09 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Sender: owner-ips@ece.cmu.edu Precedence: bulk > All the Internet documentation with which I am familiar, as well as the I think we have a case of overlapping vocabulary from two different domains. Per SCSI Architecture Model (SAM-2, SAM-3), iSCSI is very clearly a "SCSI transport protocol" (as opposed to a SCSI application layer protocol). Parallel SCSI, Fibre Channel etc. are all "SCSI transports" per SCSI conventions. That is all the critiqued abstract is trying to describe. -- Mallikarjun Mallikarjun Chadalapaka Networked Storage Architecture Network Storage Solutions Hewlett-Packard MS 5668 Roseville CA 95747 cbm@rose.hp.com ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bob Braden" To: ; Cc: ; Sent: Tuesday, February 11, 2003 3:48 PM Subject: Re: Protocol Action: iSCSI to Proposed Standard > > *> > *> The IESG has approved publishing the following Internet-Draft > *> as a Proposed Standard: > *> > *> o iSCSI > *> > *> This document is the product of the IP Storage Working Group. > *> > *> The IESG contact persons are Allison Mankin and Scott Bradner. > *> > *> > *> Technical Summary > *> > *> The Small Computer Systems Interface (SCSI) is a family of > *> protocols for communicating with I/O devices, especially storage > *> devices. SCSI is a client-server architecture. The SCSI protocol > *> has been mapped over various transports, including Parallel SCSI, > > Transports? > > The Webster's New Collegiate Dictionary defines the noun "transport" as > "strong and often intensely pleasurable emotion". ;-) > > All the Internet documentation with which I am familiar, as well as the > OSI reference model, define a "transport layer", but I don't think you > are suggesting SCSI over IP, etc. > > Can't we please resist terminology pollution? In the IETF we call these > [data] link layers. > > Bob Braden > > *> IPI, IEEE-1394 (firewire) and Fibre Channel. These transports are > *> I/O specific and have limited distance capabilities. The iSCSI > *> protocol defined in draft-ietf-ips-iscsi describes a means of > *> transporting of the SCSI packets over TCP/IP, providing for an > *> interoperable solution which can take advantage of existing > *> Internet infrastructure, Internet management facilities and > *> address distance limitations. Mapping over TCP ensures that the > *> high volume storage transfers use congestion control. > *> > *> >