From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from NAM02-SN1-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-sn1nam02on0704.outbound.protection.outlook.com [IPv6:2a01:111:f400:fe44::704]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ml01.01.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B865F1A1E46 for ; Thu, 25 Aug 2016 02:44:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: from DF4PR84MB0041.NAMPRD84.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM (10.162.192.143) by DF4PR84MB0042.NAMPRD84.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM (10.162.192.144) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_0, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_CBC_SHA_P384) id 15.1.557.21; Thu, 25 Aug 2016 09:44:35 +0000 Received: from DF4PR84MB0041.NAMPRD84.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM ([10.162.192.143]) by DF4PR84MB0041.NAMPRD84.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM ([10.162.192.143]) with mapi id 15.01.0557.030; Thu, 25 Aug 2016 09:44:36 +0000 From: "Subramanian, Sriram (EG Servers Platform SW)" To: Ye Ting , Fu Siyuan , Wu Jiaxin CC: "Zimmer, Vincent" , "Li, Ruth" , "edk2-devel@lists.01.org" Thread-Topic: Question on iBFT for iSCSI Thread-Index: AdH9QR6zDnA28uVXTFKT5bgxfDPeIABdArdg Date: Thu, 25 Aug 2016 09:44:36 +0000 Message-ID: Accept-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: authentication-results: spf=none (sender IP is ) smtp.mailfrom=sriram-s@hpe.com; x-originating-ip: [106.51.22.236] x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: 35f2bec8-2155-4387-126e-08d3cccc6cf6 x-microsoft-exchange-diagnostics: 1; DF4PR84MB0042; 6:oej9ze2USl6hYeBGzcBKin4wNnt5VeBLuX6oRSAfMtHzdQ9zJ6ZR//haBZoqEfisN3HEC+t6g9WIDkObcxJzF5x/NYisOPBkER5kq2jATrvo6B71tF5sGQxUPpNfEHuCWuaJNUhE++jnz69WJIZGnZEP9R6qccRjSl5BVU+YoxQTi3YFwjLI2BIDZAioOpu2tg9zzw4avPGIp20rhCSODF95Tt8v5tSdufkh/RhJPZ9gUEGQPtywRcTqksWKzc4A+BzIhS3RYUh9gMfpB3OtB6ijM4TxNNmBIFbSCjWlhVl6APwXviOqiTAcTWcJ48WPCO2Jr1hFGQXkmzGL+epLaQ==; 5:46ajwhF5lPyd5+VmZnDE56E8rcRIuQarMtUo3UZa+DhjBj8U4iF2A88PC5X79UQjkvqCttHv+K839AweyVsqtNdx+kg94otZCZorTiFNSQK2OkWGoCbuupE2f+e/DRJj3S96KkEOQd3F2ZDbh/YEVg==; 24:NIUSHcklZgoOBbnjuEMYMxxou32AZcg2TiYvYBKOLGp04otKUcncmleV9bL5CWTztAegbwXgEvI6MHkf5OKBjEcz+T85wJdhBuVwxjykOzk=; 7:alJo7sBim7Jg3LPXIVxfoHWmcSNeaYzgz4X7UuSKOwAeVf7e2PiXB6XXkqNizJdlB8tcTeY4Xu/R79Azcp0XCN2LkI7aKiqmuQeo3qlHr5bJWqgldvQtjx8EyWb9Y7JbDFyUP4evwHWPzrn/D8evWXDkmn4ssfK3WUFTbjPLPQFn0l3lRmkBYOeEU2MbhGYui32VKrc89DFojX911M4Dv0UbnfdMxg2VM32sTjVbd0fqWizIfJslhec8vOGzXfNh x-microsoft-antispam: UriScan:;BCL:0;PCL:0;RULEID:;SRVR:DF4PR84MB0042; x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: x-exchange-antispam-report-test: UriScan:(158342451672863)(162533806227266)(228905959029699); x-exchange-antispam-report-cfa-test: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(6040176)(601004)(2401047)(5005006)(8121501046)(10201501046)(3002001)(6055026); SRVR:DF4PR84MB0042; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:; SRVR:DF4PR84MB0042; x-forefront-prvs: 0045236D47 x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10019020)(6009001)(7916002)(189002)(199003)(377454003)(13464003)(52054003)(105586002)(99286002)(4326007)(305945005)(7846002)(7696003)(7736002)(74316002)(586003)(5660300001)(3280700002)(33656002)(3846002)(6116002)(102836003)(86362001)(87936001)(19580405001)(19580395003)(66066001)(92566002)(122556002)(97736004)(5001770100001)(10400500002)(5002640100001)(8936002)(81166006)(81156014)(189998001)(2906002)(8676002)(50986999)(3900700001)(9456002)(54356999)(101416001)(9686002)(68736007)(2900100001)(106356001)(77096005)(3660700001); DIR:OUT; SFP:1102; SCL:1; SRVR:DF4PR84MB0042; H:DF4PR84MB0041.NAMPRD84.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM; FPR:; SPF:None; PTR:InfoNoRecords; MX:1; A:1; LANG:en; received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: hpe.com does not designate permitted sender hosts) spamdiagnosticoutput: 1:99 spamdiagnosticmetadata: NSPM MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginatorOrg: hpe.com X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 25 Aug 2016 09:44:36.1381 (UTC) X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 105b2061-b669-4b31-92ac-24d304d195dc X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: DF4PR84MB0042 Subject: Re: Question on iBFT for iSCSI X-BeenThere: edk2-devel@lists.01.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: EDK II Development List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 25 Aug 2016 09:44:38 -0000 Content-Language: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Any feedback anyone? Is it reasonable to make the change to publish the con= figured/DHCP provided target IP address rather than the redirected IP to iB= FT? Thanks, Sriram. -----Original Message----- From: Subramanian, Sriram (EG Servers Platform SW)=20 Sent: Tuesday, August 23, 2016 7:01 PM To: 'Ye Ting' ; 'Fu Siyuan' ; 'Wu J= iaxin' Cc: 'Zimmer, Vincent' ; Li, Ruth ; edk2-devel@lists.01.org Subject: Question on iBFT for iSCSI All, The IScsiDxe implementation in EDK2 publishes the iBFT with the target IP a= ddress to which it connected to, and not the configured IP. These IPs will = be the same if there is no iSCSI redirection. However, if the configured ta= rget redirects the initiator to another target (as part of iSCSI Login resp= onse), the Session data is updated to the new target IP. To my knowledge, there doesn't look to be any standard/specification govern= ing this, so I believe this is open to debate.=20 The reason for this question is that the configured IP address may be that = of a server that's doing the redirect to achieve load balancing or high ava= ilability in the cluster. Now if we set the Target IP address in the iBFT to the final IP to which we= connected, we lose the redirection capability in case the target at the fi= nal IP goes down, and the OS wants to re-establish the connection.=20 If we published the original configured IP, then the OS will attempt to rec= onnect to the configured IP in the iBFT, and will get redirected to another= target which is up. So do you think it makes sense to publish the original configured static IP= (or the original IP provided via DHCP) instead of the redirected IP? What = are your thoughts on this? Thanks, Sriram.