Subject: RE: [T11.5] Re: [Ips] Request from T11.5 for editorial cleanup

From: "John Crandall" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 7 Apr 2004 10:50:27 -0700

Keith,

I still don't understand why the Fabric Name will not be the Node WWN of
the principal switch.  Is it possible as defined that someone can
populate the Fabric Name with something other than a WWN?

Also I don't understand the difference between other and dynamic unless
we add a whole lot more to expand dynamic.

Maybe you can explain this during the Ad Hoc meeting today.

Thanks,
John 

-----Original Message-----
From: [email-masked]
[mailto:[email-masked]]On Behalf Of Keith McCloghrie
Sent: Monday, March 29, 2004 10:47 AM
To: Robert Snively
Cc: [email-masked]; [email-masked]; [email-masked]; [email-masked];
[email-masked]; [email-masked]; [email-masked];
[email-masked]
Subject: [T11.5] Re: [Ips] Request from T11.5 for editorial cleanup

INCITS T11.5 Mail Reflector
********************************

> 1)  Fabric Name:
> 
> 	In FC-SW-3, Clause 7.3, Principal Switch Selection states:
>  
> 		"The Switch_Name of the Principal Switch shall be 
> 		used as the Fabric_Name."
> 
> 	In the MIB (fcmInstanceFabricId), it states: 
> 
>  		"The globally unique Fabric Identifier which identifies
the
>             fabric to which the Fibre Channel entity/entities managed
by
>             this management instance are connected, or, of which they
>             are a part.  This is typically the Node WWN of the
principal
>             switch of a Fibre Channel fabric."
> 
> 	The text should be changed to align with FC-SW-3 and indicate
> 	that the Fabric Identifier SHALL be the Node WWN of the
>       principal switch. 

How about, I change the last sentence to be:

   FC-SW-3 requires this to be the Node WWN of the principal switch
   of the Fibre Channel fabric.

> 2)  Definition of port types under FcPortType:
> 
> 	In FC-SW-3 two additional Port Types are defined, G_Port and
GL_Port.  
> 	In FC-GS-4 a third Port Type of F/NL_Port is defined.
> 
> 	Other collective ports are also defined by FC standards
> 	documents, but those are for documentation purposes 
> 	only, rather than defining functionality.
> 	Such ports include:  Nx_Port (any port with N_Port or NL_Port
> 	capability) and FC_Port (any port capable of transceiving
> 	Fibre Channel frames).  While those are actually specified
> 	as port types in FC-GS-4, that is probably an error that
> 	should be corrected in the next revision of that document.
> 	
> 	The MIB has added the port type "dynamic", not defined by any
> 	of the T11 documents.  It is suggested the "dynamic" port type
> 	be removed and that "gPort" and "glPort" be used in its place, 
> 	since that is the likely intent of the word "dynamic", 
> 	referring to a port which has not quite yet decided what it is 
> 	going to be, but has a defined protocol to make that
determination.
>
> 	Use a port type of "unknown" when you cannot identify the port
> 	according to a standard.
> 
> 	An additional port type of F/NL_Port ("fnlPort") should be 
> 	defined for applications that have that requirement.
> 
> 	For reference, FC-SW-3 defines the G and GL_Ports as follows:
> 
> 		3.1.45 G_Port: A generic Fabric Port that may 
> 				function either as an E_Port, or as an
> F_Port.
> 		3.1.46 GL_Port: A generic Fabric Port that may 
> 				function either as an E_Port, or as an
> Fx_Port.
> 
> 	For reference, FC-GS-4 defines the F/NL_Port as follows:
> 
> 		3.2.19 F/NL_Port: An NL_Port that detects OPN(00,x) 
> 				and provides Fibre Channel services in
> the
> 				absence of an FL_Port (see FC-AL-2).
 
Thanks for the information. 

I agree that "gPort" and "glPort" together represent one example
of a "determined dynamically" scenario defined by the 'dynamic'
enumeration.  However, I suggest that we want this MIB to support
multiple versions of the FC-SW specification, such that as and when
switches compliant to FC-SW-4 start shipping in the future, that this
same MIB will simultaneously support both FC-SW-3 switches and FC-SW-4
switches.  If I understand correctly, "gPort" and "glPort" were added
in SW-3 (i.e., they were not present in SW-2), and thus I would
speculate that there's a non-zero possibility that other types of
dynamic determination could be added in SW-4 or SW-5.  In other words,
I believe this MIB must not say: "you will comply with FC-SW-3", but
instead, it needs to say: "a switch compliant to FC-SW-3 will do xxx"
(for example, see the proposal I made above wrt. Fabric_Name).
That is, this MIB needs to be a superset of FC-SW-3.

Given this, then we should definitely add enumerations for a
"F/NL_Port" port, and for "gPort" and "glPort" as defined in SW-3,
but I suggest that we retain "dynamic" as well in order to give this
MIB the best chance of accommodating the future.  (Note that it has
taken many years for the IETF to get this far with this MIB.  With T11
already having started work on SW-4, let's not make any assumptions
about how long after SW-4 is approved there will be an update to
this MIB.)

Keith.

To Unsubscribe:
mailto:[email-masked]?subject=unsubscribe

_______________________________________________
Ips mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ips