Date: Thu, 26 May 2011 09:15:33 +0300 From: Daniel Braniss <danny@cs.huji.ac.il> To: Matthew Jacob <mj@feral.com> Cc: freebsd-scsi@freebsd.org Subject: Re: iscsi_initiator and tag opening problem Message-ID: <E1QPTr3-0001wu-9E@kabab.cs.huji.ac.il> In-Reply-To: <4DDD08D6.30105@feral.com> References: <E1QOqI2-0000Hy-NI@kabab.cs.huji.ac.il> <4DDBB3F7.20303@feral.com> <E1QOsMz-00028p-LN@kabab.cs.huji.ac.il> <alpine.BSF.2.00.1105241105550.40287@ns1.feral.com> <E1QP8OZ-000CmK-GP@kabab.cs.huji.ac.il> <4DDD08D6.30105@feral.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > > On 5/25/2011 12:20 AM, Daniel Braniss wrote: > > ... > > is this somehow detectable? or a list of '[non]complaint' targets is needed? > You probably should decide whether to just use SIMPLE (no matter what) > or have a list. Since it's a violation of SAM I doubt that there is a > way to detect it. > > ... > > any side effects? or should I make it tunable? > > As it stands now for FreeBSD, making them all SIMPLE would probably be > okay. Linux does that apparently. > I'd make it a tunable with the default to SIMPLE. I asked some of the > (now NetApp) Engenio engineers, and their arrays' iSCSI implementation > *does* handle all of the different tag types. I'm inclined to set the default as it was, and only if it doesn't work it can be fixed via the tunable. The reasoning is that it has worked for most targets, including NetAPP, but then again, if the new crop of targets are based on non-compliant ... > > Thanks Matthew, you made my day! > > > > > No problem. Thank you, actually. I'm starting to work more with iSCSI > for my day job which has been an interesting change. I hope it won't interfere with your valuable cooperation! cheers, danny
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?E1QPTr3-0001wu-9E>