On Fri, 2010-04-02 at 10:34 +0900, FUJITA Tomonori wrote: > On Thu, 01 Apr 2010 18:25:02 -0700 > Chandra Seetharaman <sekharan@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > On Fri, 2010-04-02 at 09:57 +0900, FUJITA Tomonori wrote: > > > On Thu, 01 Apr 2010 09:54:54 -0700 > > > Chandra Seetharaman <sekharan@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > 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. > > > > > > Yeah, we could generate 'control port' from 'iscsi ip > > > address (or port)'. However, tgt needs to support more than iSCSI. > > > > I don't see any problems with that. In future when we add portals for > > different protocols, we can create control ports for them too. > > The my point is that I prefer provide the way to specify the control > port explicitly rather than generating the port in the protocol > specific way. I am confused now :) You mean to say that tgt-admin should not be defining control-port numbers internally based on the number of targets that have target-address on them ? (instead define control-port independently and have the association defined in the target definition) ? > > > > > > 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 ? > > > > > > Yeah, by default, tgtd accepts any ip addresses of the host. Can can > > > change this behavior with 'portal' option. > > > > My question is will be allowing association of more than one ip address > > to a control port. > > Seems that you misunderstand the control port. It's not ip > address:port. It's an unix domain socket. Sorry for causing the confusion. I do understand the control port is a socket. The purpose of defining a control port (from iSCSI usage point of view) is to have a tgtd control port serving targets defined with specific ip address. My question was from that context. i.e will there be multiple iscsi portals associated with a single tgtd control port. > > You can do whatever you want against tgtd via the control port. So we > need some authentication if we allow the management over IP. We use an > unix domain socket so we can use the authentication mechanism of an > unix domain socket. > > We could implement authentication over network but I prefer to depend > on other projects about it. > > > > If that is the case would all the targets associated with that control > > port will be available thru all the ip addresses that are associated > > with that control port ? -- 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
