RE: ATA/IP & ATAPI

["Bradley, Mark" <mark_bradley@btc.adaptec.com>]

It would be prudent to attempt to include any common interfaces
in encapsulation, whether FC, SCSI, ATA or versions thereof.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: julian_satran@il.ibm.com [mailto:julian_satran@il.ibm.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, February 15, 2000 9:28 AM
> To: ips@ece.cmu.edu
> Subject: RE: ATA/IP & ATAPI
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I think we can include ATA/ATAPI within SCOT. I am not sure 
> that we should
> "surface" both ends or make it transparent to the initiator. 
> I would like
> to hear the "industry" on that.
> By making only one end visible we could have the industry 
> converge to one
> "virtual" standard.
> 
> Regards,
> Julo
> 
> "Bradley, Mark" <mark_bradley@btc.adaptec.com> on 15/02/2000 18:07:41
> 
> Please respond to "Bradley, Mark" <mark_bradley@btc.adaptec.com>
> 
> To:   "'Costa Sapuntzakis'" <csapuntz@cisco.com>, ips@ece.cmu.edu
> cc:    (bcc: Julian Satran/Haifa/IBM)
> Subject:  RE: ATA/IP & ATAPI
> 
> 
> 
> 
> About 85% of storage on IA32/64 systems is IDE/ATA.  Ignoring
> this substantial a volume seems inappropriate.  Further, there
> is a proposal for Serial ATA (SAT) that might lend better lend
> itself to this work.
>   --  markb
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Costa Sapuntzakis [mailto:csapuntz@cisco.com]
> > Sent: Tuesday, February 15, 2000 1:07 AM
> > To: ips@ece.cmu.edu
> > Subject: ATA/IP & ATAPI
> >
> >
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > What are the arguments for ATA/IP?
> >
> > -Costa
> >
> 
> 
>