Re: Scheduled Transfer Protocol on Linux

Brandon S. Allbery KF8NH (allbery@kf8nh.apk.net)
Sun, 13 Feb 2000 16:09:16 -0500

In message <200002132058.MAA22259@work.bitmover.com>, Larry McVoy writes:
+-----
| : | Imagine Linux with STP in the kernel on _both_ ends of the connection.
| :
| : Right, "simple" NASD drives in a private SAN. This differs from SCSI
| : exactly how?
|
| SCSI already runs layered on top of STP just fine, so to some extent it
| doesn't differ at all.
+--->8

I wasn't so much interested in that level as the one where SCSI is itself a
networking protocol. Current SCSI drives are effectively IDE drives with
on-board computers that do SCSI "networking"; at this level, smart drives
with STP networking differ only in that they're potentially a little more
general, and that you need to use slightly newer (but common) hardware and
code to implement it.

-- 
brandon s. allbery	   os/2,linux,solaris,perl	allbery@kf8nh.apk.net
system administrator	   kthkrb,heimdal,gnome,rt	  allbery@ece.cmu.edu
carnegie mellon / electrical and computer engineering			kf8nh
    We are Linux. Resistance is an indication that you missed the point.






-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/