On Fri, 11 Jun 2010, Miles Nordin wrote:
FCoE != iSCSI. FCoE was not being discussed in the part you're trying to contradict. If you read my entire post, I talk about FCoE at the end and say more or less ``I am talking about FCoE here only so you don't try to throw out my entire post by latching onto some corner case not applying to the OP by dragging FCoE into the mix'' which is exactly what you did. I'm guessing you fired off a reply without reading the whole thing?
I am deeply concerned that you are relying on your extensive experience with legacy ethernet technologies and have not done any research on modern technologies.
Entering "FCoE" into Google resulted in many useful hits which describe technologies which are ethernet but more advanced than the "ethernet" you generalized in your lengthy text.
For example http://www.fcoe.com/ http://www.cisco.com/en/US/prod/collateral/switches/ps9441/ps9670/white_paper_c11-462176.html http://www.brocade.com/products-solutions/solutions/connectivity/FCoE/index.page http://www.emulex.com/products/converged-network-adapters.html Bob -- Bob Friesenhahn bfrie...@simple.dallas.tx.us, http://www.simplesystems.org/users/bfriesen/ GraphicsMagick Maintainer, http://www.GraphicsMagick.org/ _______________________________________________ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
