I am seeking a few points of
clarification:
1. Fibre Channel folks have attempted to
explain to me why TCP/IP could NEVER be a viable interconnect for block level
storage operations. They claim:
a. TCP is too CPU intensive and creates too
much latency for storage I/O operations.
b. The IP stack is too top heavy and
processing packet headers is too slow to support storage I/O
operations.
c. The maximum throughput of a GE TCP/IP
connection is 768 Mps, which is too slow to support storage I/O
operations.
Is any of this true?
2. Adaptec has posited a replacement for TCP
called STP for use as a transport for storage. Does anyone know anything
about this?
3. Current discussions of the SCSI over
IP protocol seem to ignore the issue of TCP or any other transport
protocol. Does anyone know definitively what transport is being suggested
by the IBM/Cisco crowd?
4. Another storage company is looking at
Reliable UDP as a substitute for TCP in storage data transfers. Where can
I learn more about this protocol, which I am told was introduced many years ago
by Cisco?
Thanks in advance for your assistance.
Jon William Toigo
Independent Consultant and Author
|
- Re: Storage over Ethernet/IP Jon William Toigo
- Re: Storage over Ethernet/IP Mike Fisk
- Re: Storage over Ethernet/IP Dave Nagle
- Re: Storage over Ethernet/IP Jon William Toigo
- Re: Storage over Ethernet/IP Valdis . Kletnieks
- Re: Storage over Ethernet/IP RJ Atkinson
- RE: Storage over Ethernet/IP Bernard Aboba
- Re: Storage over Ethernet/IP Keith Moore
- Re: Storage over Ethernet/IP Karl Auerbach
- Re: Storage over Ethernet/IP Steve Blake
- RE: Storage over Ethernet/IP Brian . Rubarts