Linux-kernel mailing list archive 2000-06,: Re: Scheduled Transfer Protocol on Linux

# Re: Scheduled Transfer Protocol on Linux

Jes Sorensen (Jes.Sorensen@cern.ch)
11 Feb 2000 22:01:49 +0100

- Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
- Next message: James A Simmons: "Re: [PATCH] rvmalloc and rvfree"
- Previous message: Bruce Thompson: "Re: elevator-starvation-4 (2.2.14 && 2.3.42)"
- In reply to: Alan Cox: "Re: Scheduled Transfer Protocol on Linux"

>>>>> "Alan" == Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> writes:

>> One thing that I've dreamed about for a while is getting the disk
>> drive vendors to put STP down in the drives. Then we throw out the
>> SCSI/IDE cables and use RJ45 connectors to talk to both the network
>> and the disks. Think hot plug. Cool, no?

Alan> RJ45 - for GigE ? Is that really going to be cost effective ?

If 1000BaseT will do 100m (or even 50m) then it's going to cut the
cost for computer centres quite a bit. Well it means there is a chance
one may get 100BaseT in most boxes, which was not the case if one
could only get fiber.

Jes

-
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/

- Next message: James A Simmons: "Re: [PATCH] rvmalloc and rvfree"
- Previous message: Bruce Thompson: "Re: elevator-starvation-4 (2.2.14 && 2.3.42)"
- In reply to: Alan Cox: "Re: Scheduled Transfer Protocol on Linux"