On 11/18/2014 12:31 AM, Gris Ge wrote:
we have two approaches to solve this:
1. Reintroduce initiator based volume mask. Nothing need to be
changed on targetd side.
2. Access group create, then volume mask against access group.
For option 1):
Nothing need to be changed on targetd side, but LSM will have two
set of volume mask API: access group masking, initiator masking.
It's easy for design and code from LSM side, but for LSM user,
they will have to code much more lines.
For option 2):
Targetd need to allow create or list a initiator with no volume
masked.
We use these new methods(initiators(), initiator_create(),
initiator_delete()) to handle.
I'm in favor of option 2. But, why those three new methods instead of
implementing access_group_create, access_group_delete,
access_group_initiator_add, access_group_initiator_delete, and
access_groups?
targetd should be able to support these by treating all initiators with
the same 'tag' attribute as belonging to the same access group.
Regards -- Andy