Re: New List: rdma@cisco.com: to discuss RDMA

[Matt Wakeley <matt_wakeley@agilent.com>]

I object to mandating iSCSI use an RDMA option because:

- (main reason) there isn't any standardized mechanism now, and I
  don't want to hold up iSCSI while one crawls through the standards process.

- I don't think RDMA is needed.  FCP doesn't use it, and it works great with
the
  FC protocol chips that "accelerate" FCP.

-Matt Wakeley




csapuntz@cisco.com wrote:

> Does anybody on the list object to specifying an RDMA mechanism for
> use with iSCSI? Does anybody on the list object to mandating an RDMA
> mechanism? Please include your reasons.
>
> Current RDMA proposals:
> draft-csapuntz-tcprdma-00.txt
> draft-dicecco-vitcp-00.txt
>
> -Costa
>
> > Before going too far down this road, it is important to
> > understand if there is support for using an RDMA mechanism
> > as a basis for iSCSI.  Will the next draft of the iSCSI
> > protocol actually be based on an RDMA mechanism that
> > would be defined?  The answers to these questions and
> > the specific pros and cons need to be the driving
> > force behind the RDMA discussion.