I noticed that when I use "lsusb -v" on a UAS-enabled drive enclosure,
the bInterfaceProtocol line for #80/0x50 has a "protocol name" label but the
one for #98/0x62 does not:


========
# lsusb -v -s2:15 | grep Interface
  bDeviceClass            0 (Defined at Interface level)
    bNumInterfaces          1
    Interface Descriptor:
      bInterfaceNumber        0
      bInterfaceClass         8 Mass Storage
      bInterfaceSubClass      6 SCSI
      bInterfaceProtocol     80 Bulk-Only
      iInterface              0
    Interface Descriptor:
      bInterfaceNumber        0
      bInterfaceClass         8 Mass Storage
      bInterfaceSubClass      6 SCSI
      bInterfaceProtocol     98
      iInterface              0
========



So...I was wondering if there was any particular reason that protocol
98 isn't included in the usb.ids file?


As a proof of concept I added the SCSI-subclass version of the line to
the usb.ids file (see attached patch) and lsusb successfully showed a
description for the #98 line as well:

========
# lsusb -v -s2:15 | grep Interface
  bDeviceClass            0 (Defined at Interface level)
    bNumInterfaces          1
    Interface Descriptor:
      bInterfaceNumber        0
      bInterfaceClass         8 Mass Storage
      bInterfaceSubClass      6 SCSI
      bInterfaceProtocol     80 Bulk-Only
      iInterface              0
    Interface Descriptor:
      bInterfaceNumber        0
      bInterfaceClass         8 Mass Storage
      bInterfaceSubClass      6 SCSI
      bInterfaceProtocol     98 UAS
      iInterface              0
========

(This experiment was on an Ubuntu Bionic system.)

I searched the list archives (and web in general) for previous
discussion on this topic, but didn't succeed in finding this specific
issue.

(I see that 62 is in fact included in the protocol list found on
  https://usb-ids.gowdy.us/read/UC/08/06
, but it has an empty "name" column in that table -- and it's missing
completely from the current file at
  https://usb-ids.gowdy.us/usb.ids 
.)

Thanks.


							Nathan

p.s. If in fact it makes sense to add UAS to the file: I assume the UAS
protocol doesn't apply to the UFI subclass, but I don't know off hand if
it applies to the RBC subclass as well as SCSI...