1. The purpose of multiple tgtds (and the control port) is to make each tgtd dedicated to ipaddress (or port). 2. Each target will be associated with only one ip address (which also means we have to add a ip address token to target definition). (1) and (2) make me think that we do not need an explicit "control port" parameter for targets.conf syntax. If any target has a ip address specifically defined, then tgt-admin can define a control port and use it at the right place (as it does with tid currently) and keep the control port definition totally internal to tgt-admin. Does it make sense ? Or am I missing something ? I had a related question, will we ever want to make multiple ip addresses served by a single tgtd ? On Wed, 2010-03-31 at 18:38 +1100, ronnie sahlberg wrote: > Hi Tomasz > > tgtd and tgtadm now supports a -C, --control-port=X argument allowing > to run multiple instances of tgtd in parallel, each one bound to a > dedicated ip address or port. > > As the developer/maintainer of tgt-admin, would you consider adding a > -C, --control-port argument to tgt-admin? > If this argument is used, all calls to tgtadm would be changed to use > --control-port=X too ? > > > regards > ronnie sahlberg > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe stgt" in > the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe stgt" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
