draft-ietf-storm-rddp-registries-00.txt   draft-ietf-storm-rddp-registries-01.txt 
Storage Maintenance (storm) Working Group Michael Ko Storage Maintenance (storm) Working Group Michael Ko
Internet Draft Huawei Symantec Internet Draft Huawei Symantec
Intended status: Proposed Standard David L. Black Intended status: Proposed Standard David L. Black
Expires: April 2012 EMC Expires: June 2012 EMC
October 18, 2011 December 21, 2011
IANA Registries for the RDDP IANA Registries for the RDDP
(Remote Direct Data Placement) Protocols (Remote Direct Data Placement) Protocols
draft-ietf-storm-rddp-registries-00.txt draft-ietf-storm-rddp-registries-01.txt
Status of this Memo Status of this Memo
This Internet-Draft is submitted to IETF in full conformance with This Internet-Draft is submitted to IETF in full conformance with
the provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. the provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that
other groups may also distribute working documents as other groups may also distribute working documents as
Internet-Drafts. Internet-Drafts.
skipping to change at page 1, line 34 skipping to change at page 1, line 34
documents at any time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts documents at any time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts
as reference material or to cite them other than as "work in as reference material or to cite them other than as "work in
progress." progress."
The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at
http://www.ietf.org/1id-abstracts.html. http://www.ietf.org/1id-abstracts.html.
The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at
http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html. http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html.
This Internet-Draft will expire on April, 2012. This Internet-Draft will expire on June 21, 2012.
Abstract Abstract
The original RFCs that specified the RDDP protocol suite did not The original RFCs that specified the RDDP protocol suite did not
create IANA registries for RDDP error codes, operation codes and create IANA registries for RDDP error codes, operation codes and
function codes. Extensions to the RDDP protocols now require function codes. Extensions to the RDDP protocols now require
these registries to be created. This memo creates the RDDP these registries to be created. This memo creates the RDDP
registries, populates them with values defined in the original registries, populates them with values defined in the original
RDDP RFCs, and provides guidance to IANA for future assignment RDDP RFCs, and provides guidance to IANA for future assignment
of code points within these registries. of code points within these registries.
skipping to change at page 3, line 18 skipping to change at page 3, line 18
3.1 RDMAP Errors 3.1 RDMAP Errors
Name of the registry: "RDMAP Errors" Name of the registry: "RDMAP Errors"
Namespace details: An RDMAP (Remote Direct Memory Access Protocol) Namespace details: An RDMAP (Remote Direct Memory Access Protocol)
error is a 16 bit field divided into three subfields [RFC5040]: error is a 16 bit field divided into three subfields [RFC5040]:
o 4-bit Layer, MUST be 0x0 for RDMAP errors o 4-bit Layer, MUST be 0x0 for RDMAP errors
o 4-bit Error Type o 4-bit Error Type
o 8-bit Error Code o 8-bit Error Code
The Error Code field is OPTIONAL for this registry, as Error Codes The Error Code field is OPTIONAL for this registry, as Error Codes
are not used with all RDMAP Error Types. Any 8-bit value MAY be are not used with all RDMAP Error Types. When no numerical Error
used as the Error Code when the Error Code field is omitted from the Code is registered, any 8-bit value MAY be used as the Error Code,
corresponding registry entry, as the Layer and Error Type values are as the Layer and Error Type values are sufficient to specify the
sufficient to specify the error. For this reason, if an RDMAP Error error. For this reason, if an RDMAP Error Type is registered
Type is registered without an Error Code, IANA MUST NOT add an entry without an Error Code, IANA MUST NOT add an entry to this registry
to this registry with an Error Code for the same Error Type. with an Error Code for the same Error Type.
Information that must be provided to assign a new value: An IESG- Information that must be provided to assign a new value: An IESG-
approved standards-track specification defining the semantics and approved standards-track specification defining the semantics and
interoperability requirements of the proposed new value and the interoperability requirements of the proposed new value and the
fields to be recorded in the registry. fields to be recorded in the registry.
Assignment policy: If the requested value is not already assigned, Assignment policy: If the requested value is not already assigned,
it may be assigned to the requester. it may be assigned to the requester.
Fields to record in the registry: Layer/Error-Type/Error-Code, Fields to record in the registry: Layer/Error-Type/Error-Code,
Error-Type-Name/Error-Code-Name, RFC Reference. The Error-Code Error-Type-Name/Error-Code-Name, RFC Reference. The Error-Code
and Error-Code-Name are omitted for Error-Types that do not have and Error-Code-Name are omitted for Error-Types that do not have
Error-Codes. Error-Codes.
When a specific error code is not registered, the registry entry
contains the string "ALL" for the Error Code instead of a numerical
value, and the Error Code Name is omitted from the registry entry.
Initial registry contents: Initial registry contents:
0x0/0x0, Local Catastrophic Error, [RFC5040] 0x0/0x0/ALL , Local Catastrophic Error, [RFC5040]
0x0/0x1/0x00, Remote Protection Error / Invalid Steering Tag, 0x0/0x1/0x00, Remote Protection Error / Invalid Steering Tag,
[RFC5040] [RFC5040]
0x0/0x1/0x01, Remote Protection Error / Base or bounds violation, 0x0/0x1/0x01, Remote Protection Error / Base or bounds violation,
[RFC5040] [RFC5040]
0x0/0x1/0x02, Remote Protection Error / Access rights violation, 0x0/0x1/0x02, Remote Protection Error / Access rights violation,
[RFC5040] [RFC5040]
0x0/0x1/0x03, Remote Protection Error / Steering Tag not associated 0x0/0x1/0x03, Remote Protection Error / Steering Tag not associated
with RDMAP Stream, [RFC5040] with RDMAP Stream, [RFC5040]
0x0/0x1/0x04, Remote Protection Error / Tagged Offset wrap, 0x0/0x1/0x04, Remote Protection Error / Tagged Offset wrap,
[RFC5040] [RFC5040]
0x0/0x1/0x09, Remote Protection Error / Steering Tag cannot be 0x0/0x1/0x09, Remote Protection Error / Steering Tag cannot be
invalidated, [RFC5040] invalidated, [RFC5040]
0x0/0x1/0xff, Remote Protection Error / Unspecified Error, 0x0/0x1/0xff, Remote Protection Error / Unspecified Error,
skipping to change at page 5, line 14 skipping to change at page 5, line 14
3.2 DDP Errors 3.2 DDP Errors
Name of the registry: "DDP Errors" Name of the registry: "DDP Errors"
Namespace details: A DDP (Direct Data Placement) error is a 16 bit Namespace details: A DDP (Direct Data Placement) error is a 16 bit
field divided into three subfields [RFC5041]: field divided into three subfields [RFC5041]:
o 4-bit Layer, MUST be 0x1 for DDP errors o 4-bit Layer, MUST be 0x1 for DDP errors
o 4-bit Error Type o 4-bit Error Type
o 8-bit Error Code o 8-bit Error Code
The Error Code field is REQUIRED for this registry. The Error Code field is REQUIRED for this registry, except for the
registry entry that reserves a set of errors for use by the Lower
Layer Protocol.
Information that must be provided to assign a new value: An IESG- Information that must be provided to assign a new value: An IESG-
approved standards-track specification defining the semantics and approved standards-track specification defining the semantics and
interoperability requirements of the proposed new value and the interoperability requirements of the proposed new value and the
fields to be recorded in the registry. fields to be recorded in the registry.
Assignment policy: If the requested value is not already assigned, Assignment policy: If the requested value is not already assigned,
it may be assigned to the requester. it may be assigned to the requester.
Fields to record in the registry: Layer/Error-Type/Error-Code, Fields to record in the registry: Layer/Error-Type/Error-Code,
Error-Type-Name/Error-Code-Name, RFC Reference. Error-Type-Name/Error-Code-Name, RFC Reference.
The last registry entry in the initial registry contents below
reserves a set of errors for use by the Lower Layer Protocol.
That entry uses "ALL" for the Error Code and omits the Error Code
Name. For all other entries in this registry, the string "ALL"
MUST NOT be used for the Error Code, and an Error Code Name MUST
be part of the registry entry.
Initial registry contents: Initial registry contents:
0x1/0x0/0x00, Local Catastrophic, [RFC5041] 0x1/0x0/0x00, Local Catastrophic, [RFC5041]
0x1/0x1/0x00, Tagged Buffer Error / Invalid Steering Tag, [RFC5041] 0x1/0x1/0x00, Tagged Buffer Error / Invalid Steering Tag, [RFC5041]
0x1/0x1/0x01, Tagged Buffer Error / Base or bounds violation, 0x1/0x1/0x01, Tagged Buffer Error / Base or bounds violation,
[RFC5041] [RFC5041]
0x1/0x1/0x02, Tagged Buffer Error / Steering Tag not associated with 0x1/0x1/0x02, Tagged Buffer Error / Steering Tag not associated with
skipping to change at page 5, line 42 skipping to change at page 6, line 4
0x1/0x1/0x01, Tagged Buffer Error / Base or bounds violation, 0x1/0x1/0x01, Tagged Buffer Error / Base or bounds violation,
[RFC5041] [RFC5041]
0x1/0x1/0x02, Tagged Buffer Error / Steering Tag not associated with 0x1/0x1/0x02, Tagged Buffer Error / Steering Tag not associated with
DDP Stream, [RFC5041] DDP Stream, [RFC5041]
0x1/0x1/0x03, Tagged Buffer Error / Tagged Offset wrap, [RFC5041] 0x1/0x1/0x03, Tagged Buffer Error / Tagged Offset wrap, [RFC5041]
0x1/0x1/0x04, Tagged Buffer Error / Invalid DDP version, [RFC5041] 0x1/0x1/0x04, Tagged Buffer Error / Invalid DDP version, [RFC5041]
0x1/0x2/0x01, Untagged Buffer Error / Invalid Queue Number, 0x1/0x2/0x01, Untagged Buffer Error / Invalid Queue Number,
[RFC5041] [RFC5041]
0x1/0x2/0x02, Untagged Buffer Error / Invalid Message Sequence 0x1/0x2/0x02, Untagged Buffer Error / Invalid Message Sequence
Number - no buffer available, [RFC5041] Number - no buffer available, [RFC5041]
0x1/0x2/0x03, Untagged Buffer Error / Invalid Message Sequence 0x1/0x2/0x03, Untagged Buffer Error / Invalid Message Sequence
Number - Message Sequence Number range is not valid, [RFC5041] Number - Message Sequence Number range is not valid, [RFC5041]
0x1/0x2/0x04, Untagged Buffer Error / Invalid Message Offset, 0x1/0x2/0x04, Untagged Buffer Error / Invalid Message Offset,
[RFC5041] [RFC5041]
0x1/0x2/0x05, Untagged Buffer Error / DDP Message too long for 0x1/0x2/0x05, Untagged Buffer Error / DDP Message too long for
available buffer, [RFC5041] available buffer, [RFC5041]
0x1/0x2/0x06, Untagged Buffer Error / Invalid DDP version, 0x1/0x2/0x06, Untagged Buffer Error / Invalid DDP version,
[RFC5041] [RFC5041]
0x1/0x3, Reserved for use by Lower Layer Protocol, [RFC5041] 0x1/0x3/ALL , Reserved for use by Lower Layer Protocol, [RFC5041]
All combinations not listed above that combine 0x1 as the Layer with All combinations not listed above that combine 0x1 as the Layer with
an Error Type and Error Code are Unassigned and available to IANA an Error Type and Error Code are Unassigned and available to IANA
for assignment. for assignment.
Allocation Policy: Standards Action ([RFC5226]) Allocation Policy: Standards Action ([RFC5226])
3.3 MPA Errors 3.3 MPA Errors
Name of the registry: "MPA Errors" Name of the registry: "MPA Errors"
skipping to change at page 7, line 27 skipping to change at page 7, line 27
approved standards-track specification defining the semantics and approved standards-track specification defining the semantics and
interoperability requirements of the proposed new value and the interoperability requirements of the proposed new value and the
fields to be recorded in the registry. fields to be recorded in the registry.
Assignment policy: If the requested value is not already assigned, Assignment policy: If the requested value is not already assigned,
it may be assigned to the requester. it may be assigned to the requester.
Fields to record in the registry: Layer/Error-Type/Error-Code, Fields to record in the registry: Layer/Error-Type/Error-Code,
Error-Type-Name/Error-Code-Name, RFC Reference. Error-Type-Name/Error-Code-Name, RFC Reference.
The string "ALL" MUST NOT be used for the Error Code in this
registry, and an Error Code Name is REQUIRED in every entry in
this registry.
Initial registry contents: Initial registry contents:
0x2/0x0/0x01, MPA Error / TCP connection closed, terminated, or 0x2/0x0/0x01, MPA Error / TCP connection closed, terminated, or
lost, [RFC5044] lost, [RFC5044]
0x2/0x0/0x02, MPA Error / MPA CRC Error, [RFC5044] 0x2/0x0/0x02, MPA Error / MPA CRC Error, [RFC5044]
0x2/0x0/0x03, MPA Error / MPA Marker and ULPDU Length field 0x2/0x0/0x03, MPA Error / MPA Marker and ULPDU Length field
mismatch, [RFC5044] mismatch, [RFC5044]
skipping to change at page 10, line 30 skipping to change at page 10, line 30
[RFC5044] P. Culley et al., "Marker PDU Aligned Framing for TCP [RFC5044] P. Culley et al., "Marker PDU Aligned Framing for TCP
Specification", RFC 5044, October 2007. Specification", RFC 5044, October 2007.
[RFC5226] T. Narten and H. Alvestrand, "Guidelines for Writing [RFC5226] T. Narten and H. Alvestrand, "Guidelines for Writing
an IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", RFC 5226, BCP 26, an IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", RFC 5226, BCP 26,
May 2008. May 2008.
5. Informative References 5. Informative References
[MPA-PEER] A. Kanevsky, et al., "Enhanced RDMA Connection [MPA-PEER] A. Kanevsky, et al., "Enhanced RDMA Connection
Establishment", draft-ietf-storm-mpa-peer-connect-07, work Establishment", draft-ietf-storm-mpa-peer-connect-09, work
in progress, September 2011. in progress, December 2011.
[RDMAP-EXT] H. Shah, et al., "RDMA Protocol Extensions", [RDMAP-EXT] H. Shah, et al., "RDMA Protocol Extensions",
draft-ietf-storm-rdmap-ext-01, work in progress, July 2011. draft-ietf-storm-rdmap-ext-01, work in progress, July 2011.
6. Acknowledgments 6. Acknowledgments
TBD IANA's review of a draft version of this document indicated
the need for some corrections; the authors thank IANA for
that review.
Author's Address Author's Address
Michael Ko Michael Ko
Huawei Symantec Huawei Symantec
20245 Stevens Creek Blvd. 20245 Stevens Creek Blvd.
Cupertino, CA 95014, USA Cupertino, CA 95014, USA
Phone: +1-408-510-7465 Phone: +1-408-510-7465
Email: michael@huaweisymantec.com Email: michael@huaweisymantec.com
 End of changes. 16 change blocks. 
18 lines changed or deleted 37 lines changed or added

This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.41. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/