From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Mar 11 10:52:24 2009 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7DFA9106564A; Wed, 11 Mar 2009 10:52:24 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from petefrench@ticketswitch.com) Received: from constantine.ticketswitch.com (constantine.ticketswitch.com [IPv6:2002:57e0:1d4e:1::3]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 42C8E8FC15; Wed, 11 Mar 2009 10:52:24 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from petefrench@ticketswitch.com) Received: from dilbert.rattatosk ([10.64.50.6] helo=dilbert.ticketswitch.com) by constantine.ticketswitch.com with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.69 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1LhM2m-000GuW-4p; Wed, 11 Mar 2009 10:52:12 +0000 Received: from petefrench by dilbert.ticketswitch.com with local (Exim 4.69 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1LhM2m-000G5r-2V; Wed, 11 Mar 2009 10:52:12 +0000 To: aoyama@peach.ne.jp, freebsd-scsi@freebsd.org, freebsd-stable@freebsd.org In-Reply-To: Message-Id: From: Pete French Date: Wed, 11 Mar 2009 10:52:12 +0000 X-Mailman-Approved-At: Wed, 11 Mar 2009 11:29:59 +0000 Cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Tester wanted for multipath failover iSCSI target software X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 11 Mar 2009 10:52:25 -0000 > Now istgt is a part of ports. (net/istgt) > FreeBSD issue is solved by danny's patch. > After applying the patch, iscontrol can connect to istgt. I am interested in giving this a try, though not immediately as I am away from the office at the moment. Do I need to apply a patch to iscontrol to make it work though ? I can't work it out from your statement above. > Here is release 20090309 latest committed to ports. > http://shell.peach.ne.jp/aoyama/archives/345 Than ks. Is the intent to integrate with the base system eventually rather than have it in ports ? It would be nice to have a native implementation which could then be integrated with ZFS. Will let you know how I get on... -pete.