From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Thu, 28 Jun 2001 22:33:31 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Thu, 28 Jun 2001 22:33:22 -0400 Received: from quechua.inka.de ([212.227.14.2]:14394 "EHLO mail.inka.de") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Thu, 28 Jun 2001 22:33:04 -0400 From: Bernd Eckenfels To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Linux and system area networks In-Reply-To: <52d77o46ra.fsf@love-boat.topspincom.com> X-Newsgroups: ka.lists.linux.kernel User-Agent: tin/1.5.8-20010221 ("Blue Water") (UNIX) (Linux/2.0.39 (i686)) Message-Id: Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2001 04:33:04 +0200 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org In article <52d77o46ra.fsf@love-boat.topspincom.com> you wrote: > We seem to have come full circle. My original question was about > providing a better way for sockets applications to take advantage of > SAN hardware. W2K Datacenter introduces "Winsock Direct," which will > bypass the protocol stack when appropriate. The Infiniband people are > working on a "Sockets Direct" standard, which is a similar idea. No > one seems to care about this for Linux. Well, there is some work done by the zero-copy folks and the sendfile() function. Realy much more than a mmaped network socket is not needed. Besides it looks like SAN will go all the way in the IP Direction sooner or later anyway :) There are some interesting Features like accessing MS SQL 7.0 Server via VIA architecture interfaces over SAN, I am not sure o how open VIA is. Greetings Bernd