[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: FW: [Ips] Recent comments about FCoE and iSCSI


Out of curiosity, unless someone is proposing a change in the iSCSI spec to accommodate something unique to FCoE, isn't this entire debate really not an IETF topic? Until the proponents of FCoE make their draft proposals available for public consumption and debate, this discussion is somewhat occurring in a vacuum. Same goes for comprehending all that is in DCE. It needs to be completely public to understand whether what is proposed makes sense to the broader implementation community w.r.t. to storage.

Mike


At 02:25 PM 4/26/2007, John Hufferd wrote: 
David,
The first part of you question has perhaps a different answer than you
"In other words" part.

The first answer is it communicates the same way a FC adapter
communicates with iSCSI based storage --- via FC to iSCSI gateways.

The answer you maybe asking (in your Other Words part) is that it is
possible for a smart NIC that supports maybe iSCSI, TOE, NIC, and even
perhaps iWARP, to have another interface that supports FCoE.  The FCoE
part would send FC frames through the same NIC that was used by the
iSCSI part, but the FCoE frames would be headed (without a gateway) to a
different place then the iSCSI frames were headed.

.
.
.
John L Hufferd
Sr. Executive Director of Technology
jhufferd at brocade.com
Office Phone: (408) 333-5244; eFAX: (408) 904-4688
Alt Office Phone: (408) 997-6136; Cell: (408) 627-9606


-----Original Message-----
From: brown_David1 at emc.com [mailto:brown_David1 at emc.com]
Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2007 11:49 AM
To: ips at ietf.org
Subject: RE: FW: [Ips] Recent comments about FCoE and iSCSI

How would an FCoE-based initiator communicate with iSCSI-based storage?

In other words, can the same host adapter be used for FCoE connections
and iSCSI sessions, and if so, would the performance be similar?

thanks,
dj
________________________________

        From: John Hufferd [mailto:jhufferd at Brocade.COM]
        Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2007 12:52 AM
        To: Sandars, Ken; Eddy Quicksall; Julian Satran
        Cc: ips at ietf.org
        Subject: RE: FW: [Ips] Recent comments about FCoE and iSCSI



        Ken,

        The term FCoE has as its primary component FC.  Consider the
possibility that the DCE Link from the Host connects to a switch/device
that is able to deal with the FC part of the FCoE.



        .

        .

        .

        John L Hufferd

        Sr. Executive Director of Technology

        jhufferd at brocade.com <mailto:jhufferd at brocade.com>

        Office Phone: (408) 333-5244; eFAX: (408) 904-4688

        Alt Office Phone: (408) 997-6136; Cell: (408) 627-9606



        ________________________________

                From: Sandars, Ken [mailto:ken_sandars at adaptec.com]
        Sent: Wednesday, April 25, 2007 6:41 PM
        To: John Hufferd; Eddy Quicksall; Julian Satran
        Cc: ips at ietf.org
        Subject: RE: FW: [Ips] Recent comments about FCoE and iSCSI



        Hey John,



        [Hufferd] Many servers are asking for an evolutionary way to
combine their Networking connections from the Server.  The customers I
have dealt with do NOT want to rip out FC, they want to provide a single
Link for transport of all networking needs, including storage, exiting
their servers.


        I'm not sure what you are saying here. Are you saying servers
should have a single type of physical network connection, presumably
ethernet? How does that align with not wanting to rip out FC?



        Thanks

        Ken



_______________________________________________
Ips mailing list
Ips at ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ips


_______________________________________________
Ips mailing list
Ips at ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ips





_______________________________________________
Ips mailing list
Ips at ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ips