|
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] RE: iFCP as an IP Storage Work ItemRegarding #1: I believe the existing FC host drivers and HBA's will work quite well using FCIP or an iSCSI gateway. A gateway protocol is not required to allow an iSCSI HBA to function with an existing FC device. Regarding #2: under IETF rules there will be no support from multiple companies, only individual contributors:) -----Original Message----- From: owner-ips@ece.cmu.edu [mailto:owner-ips@ece.cmu.edu]On Behalf Of Mark A. Carlson Sent: Wednesday, January 03, 2001 4:14 PM To: Ips@Ece. Cmu. Edu Cc: 'David Peterson'; 'Black_David@emc.com' Subject: Re: iFCP as an IP Storage Work Item In my mind, the issue of whether this should be a work item should only revolve around two issues: 1) Is there a customer need for this kind of protocol that is not being addressed by this or other working groups? 2) Is there enough interest in the working group (from multiple companies) to support the development of the protocol? On 1), I suspect that we will need to address some sort of "gateway" protocol for customers to use in transitioning from FC Fabrics to IP Networks. Today's reality is that we have FC host OS drivers and HBAs as well as FC devices that will be with us for some time during the transition. If you assume that you need a gateway protocol that does not require the upgrade of either end, I think that 1) is satisfied. There may be other gateway protocols needed as well for when you have an iSCSI HBA and OS Driver, but existing FC devices. Look at the market for the FC/Parallel SCSI routers/bridges to see a similar transitioning market. Whether we standardize it or not, these type of devices will exist due to the market need. On 2), I'd like to see more diversity in the support of iFCP among individuals from more than just the handful of companies that have spoken so far, but the real proof is in the interest in helping to author the related documents. One possibility is to task a subgroup with FC to IP storage transition protocols, and leave the FCIP subgroup to focus just on the bridging and tunneling issues. My thoughts. -- mark
Home Last updated: Tue Sep 04 01:05:57 2001 6315 messages in chronological order |