P1394 Mail Archive: Re: P1394> Dynamic LUNs

P1394 Mail Archive: Re: P1394> Dynamic LUNs

Re: P1394> Dynamic LUNs

Randy Turner (rturner@sharplabs.com)
Sun, 24 May 1998 02:46:39 -0700

I'm not sure what you are recommending in comment (B) below. If this came
up at the Virginia meeting, can someone elaborate as if LUN 0 for a
particular unit has been "allocated" by Microsoft or some other group?


At 05:03 PM 5/14/98 -0700, Greg Shue wrote:
>Here's some comments on the Dynamic LUN notes sent out by Alan.
>A) I don't think the Dynamic Logical Unit Number scheme was
> intended to _multiplex_ applications to device functions.
> I think it is intended on providing the ability for a node
> to establish a unique connection to identical instances of
> a service without having to:
> 1- Assign fixed LUNs for each service instance
> 2- Crowd the Config ROM with redundant information
>B) After discussions with folks from Microsoft, I would strongly
> recommend NOT using LUN 0 (zero) for anything but a direct
> connection to an instance of the transport client. The LUN-server
> could easily be identified in the Config ROM as belonging to
> a different LUN. (Since it's really a different service
> than the transport client.)
>C) The SBP-2 initiator and target drivers do not change a bit.
> Reconnect proceeds normally. The initiator and target SBP-2
> drivers must already remember LUNs, EUI-64 values, and LoginIDs.
>D) The SBP-2 driver probably will already map connections (LoginIDs?)
> to a socket ID or some other appropriate OS mechanism.
>It still strikes me as a clean, simple way to get beyond the constraints
>of SBP-2 when appropriate. Best of all, it's optional!
>Greg Shue
>Hewlett-Packard Company
>Office Products Division gregs@sdd.hp.com