On Fri, 2014-02-14 at 11:43 +0530, Tejas Vaykole wrote: > On 2/13/2014 4:22 AM, Nicholas A. Bellinger wrote: <SNIP> > > So the two cases where Boolean AND + "No", and Boolean OR + "Yes" allow > > for an optional response are defined in Section 5.2.2. Simple-value > > Negotiations: > > > > "In Boolean negotiations (i.e., those that result in keys taking the > > values Yes or No), the accepting party MUST answer with the same key > > and the result of the negotiation when the received value does not > > determine that result by itself. The last value transmitted becomes > > the negotiation result. The rules for selecting the value to answer > > with are expressed as Boolean functions of the value received, and > > the value that the accepting party would have selected if given a > > choice. > > > > Specifically, the two cases in which answers are OPTIONAL are: > > > > - The Boolean function is "AND" and the value "No" is received. > > The outcome of the negotiation is "No". > > - The Boolean function is "OR" and the value "Yes" is received. > > The outcome of the negotiation is "Yes". > > > > Responses are REQUIRED in all other cases, and the value chosen and > > sent by the acceptor becomes the outcome of the negotiation." > > > > However, you'll notice some other special cases beyond these two Boolean > > cases defined in Section 5.2.2 to set the optional reply bit as a > > work-around for a few broken initiator implementations we've encountered > > along the way.. > > > > These work-arounds have been in place for ~5 years at the point, and > > thus far we've not run into any problems specific to these changes with > > complaint initiators. > > > > --nab > > > > > > > Hi Nicholas, > > Thanks for the quick response. However i have a similar related question > regarding the "OFMarker" and "IFMarker". > > For example When 'OFMarker=Yes' is set at the target and > 'OFMarker=Yes" is sent by the client for negotiation. > I am expecting "Yes" in response. ( RFC 5.2.2. Simple-value Negotiations > and RFC A.3.1. OFMarker, IFMarker). > > A.3.1. OFMarker, IFMarker > Use: IO > Senders: Initiator and Target > Scope: CO > OFMarker=<boolean-value> > IFMarker=<boolean-value> > Default is No. > Result function is AND. > > However, I am getting "OFMarker=No" .This behavior is also seen while > negotiating 'IFMarker=Yes' on both target > and client. Is LIO behaving correctly in this case? Please share your > comments. > Support for [O,I]FMarker=yes (sync and steering layer) operation was removed shortly after the original v3.1 merge of iscsi-target code. These parameters are left-over NOPs, and also should be removed. --nab -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe target-devel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
