Comment 6 for bug 1917750

I'm not entirely sure how using a different volume_backend_name would help? As you say above the first target on both hosts would still have the 60000000000000000e0000000001 prefix regardless of the name right?

Moving to a single service multibackend approach would be best but given required job changes etc isn't something I think we can do in the short term.

Moving to lioadm is still my preferred short term solution to this with the following devstack change awaiting reviews below:

cinder: Default CINDER_ISCSI_HELPER to lioadm on Ubuntu
https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/devstack/+/779624