From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Douglas Gilbert Subject: Re: Transport ID in Persistent Reservation Date: Thu, 08 Mar 2007 08:34:50 -0500 Message-ID: <45F010FA.4010001@torque.net> References: <6bd7946f0703080054u113ffd1aj1f4e2d90c8914a25@mail.gmail.com> Reply-To: dougg@torque.net Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from pentafluge.infradead.org ([213.146.154.40]:52275 "EHLO pentafluge.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751818AbXCHNgM (ORCPT ); Thu, 8 Mar 2007 08:36:12 -0500 In-Reply-To: <6bd7946f0703080054u113ffd1aj1f4e2d90c8914a25@mail.gmail.com> Sender: linux-scsi-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org To: renuka apte Cc: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org renuka apte wrote: > The 'Specify Initiator Ports' support in persistent reservation allows > the application client to send a bunch of transport IDs which identify > initiator ports. I would like to know the suggested format for these > transport IDs. http://www.t10.org/ftp/t10/drafts/spc4/spc4r09.pdf section 7.5.4 "TransportID identifiers" > I am assuming that it must have something to do with the WWN of the > initiator ports. and that is transport dependent. > I tried using sg_utils to issue a persistent reservation IN command > with "READ FULL STATUS" to a virtual SCSI disk which is returning the > response in the format specified in SPC-4. However the sg_utils seems > to be decoding the transport ID in some way that I cant find in the > standard. Have another look :-) Doug Gilbert