* Re: storage over IP (was Re: [PLEASE-TESTME] Zerocopy networking patch,
@ 2001-01-10 4:18 Cacophonix
0 siblings, 0 replies; 2+ messages in thread
From: Cacophonix @ 2001-01-10 4:18 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Alan Cox, dean gaudet
Cc: Ingo Molnar, Rik van Riel, David S. Miller, hch, netdev, linux-kernel
I haven't tracked the IP storage group too closely, but was at the San Diego IETF
where there were some interesting debates about this issue.
There is a write-up at http://ips.pdl.cs.cmu.edu/mail/msg02598.html
Now I'm not sure if I agree with some of the assumptions. And I share your concern
about using multiple tcp streams.
Thoughts?
cheers,
karthik
--- Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> wrote:
> > <http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ips-fcovertcpip-01.txt>
> > show that both use TCP/IP. TCP/IP has variable length headers (or am i on
> > crack?), which totally complicates the receive path.
>
> TCP has variable length headers. It also prevents you re-ordering commands
> in the stream which would be beneficial. I've not checked if the draft uses
> multiple TCP streams but then you have scaling questions.
>
> Alan
>
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Photos - Share your holiday photos online!
http://photos.yahoo.com/
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread
* Re: storage over IP (was Re: [PLEASE-TESTME] Zerocopy networking patch,
2001-01-10 2:56 storage over IP (was Re: [PLEASE-TESTME] Zerocopy networking patch, 2.4.0-1) dean gaudet
@ 2001-01-10 3:05 ` Alan Cox
0 siblings, 0 replies; 2+ messages in thread
From: Alan Cox @ 2001-01-10 3:05 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: dean gaudet
Cc: Ingo Molnar, Rik van Riel, David S. Miller, hch, netdev, linux-kernel
> fixed length headers). i've never investigated the actual protocols
> though so maybe the solution used was to just push a lot of the detail
> down into the controllers.
The stuff I have access to (MPT fusion) pushes the FC handling down onto the
board. Basically you talk scsi and IP to it (See drivers/message/fusion in
-ac)
> <http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ips-fcovertcpip-01.txt>
> show that both use TCP/IP. TCP/IP has variable length headers (or am i on
> crack?), which totally complicates the receive path.
TCP has variable length headers. It also prevents you re-ordering commands
in the stream which would be beneficial. I've not checked if the draft uses
multiple TCP streams but then you have scaling questions.
Alan
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2001-01-10 4:18 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2001-01-10 4:18 storage over IP (was Re: [PLEASE-TESTME] Zerocopy networking patch, Cacophonix
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2001-01-10 2:56 storage over IP (was Re: [PLEASE-TESTME] Zerocopy networking patch, 2.4.0-1) dean gaudet
2001-01-10 3:05 ` storage over IP (was Re: [PLEASE-TESTME] Zerocopy networking patch, Alan Cox
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®