RE: FW: [Ips] Recent comments about FCoE and iSCSI
"John Hufferd" <jhufferd@Brocade.COM> Thu, 26 April 2007 21:25 UTC
Return-path: <ips-bounces@ietf.org>
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HhBSt-0006i0-Q8; Thu, 26 Apr 2007 17:25:23 -0400
Received: from ips by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1HhBSs-0006hK-Fe for ips-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Thu, 26 Apr 2007 17:25:22 -0400
Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HhBSs-0006h5-5z for ips@ietf.org; Thu, 26 Apr 2007 17:25:22 -0400
Received: from mx20.brocade.com ([66.243.153.19]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HhBSr-0001VG-Ru for ips@ietf.org; Thu, 26 Apr 2007 17:25:22 -0400
Received: from discus.brocade.com ([192.168.126.240]) by mx20.brocade.com with ESMTP; 26 Apr 2007 14:25:21 -0700
X-IronPort-AV: i="4.14,457,1170662400"; d="scan'208"; a="8698343:sNHT20805176"
Received: from HQ-EXCHFE-3.corp.brocade.com (unknown [192.168.126.212]) by discus.brocade.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9A5D22383AD; Thu, 26 Apr 2007 14:24:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from hq-exch-1.corp.brocade.com ([10.3.8.21]) by HQ-EXCHFE-3.corp.brocade.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Thu, 26 Apr 2007 14:25:25 -0700
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Subject: RE: FW: [Ips] Recent comments about FCoE and iSCSI
Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2007 14:25:18 -0700
Message-ID: <39BA3BC178B4394DB184389E88A97F8C0233B17C@hq-exch-1.corp.brocade.com>
In-Reply-To: <75852864BAD9684FBF5DCF4289DE4076078FFA97@CORPUSMX30B.corp.emc.com>
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
Thread-Topic: FW: [Ips] Recent comments about FCoE and iSCSI
Thread-Index: AceHbhab+EXeFVfgQWiH7jzYWydYaAAKX7IQAAKlUiAABWKvIAAeuqUAAAVgg0A=
From: John Hufferd <jhufferd@Brocade.COM>
To: brown_David1@emc.com, ips@ietf.org
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 26 Apr 2007 21:25:25.0710 (UTC) FILETIME=[67B2A6E0:01C78849]
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: 287c806b254c6353fcb09ee0e53bbc5e
Cc:
X-BeenThere: ips@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: IP Storage <ips.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ips>, <mailto:ips-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:ips@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ips-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ips>, <mailto:ips-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: ips-bounces@ietf.org
David, The first part of you question has perhaps a different answer than you "In other words" part. The first answer is it communicates the same way a FC adapter communicates with iSCSI based storage --- via FC to iSCSI gateways. The answer you maybe asking (in your Other Words part) is that it is possible for a smart NIC that supports maybe iSCSI, TOE, NIC, and even perhaps iWARP, to have another interface that supports FCoE. The FCoE part would send FC frames through the same NIC that was used by the iSCSI part, but the FCoE frames would be headed (without a gateway) to a different place then the iSCSI frames were headed. . . . John L Hufferd Sr. Executive Director of Technology jhufferd@brocade.com Office Phone: (408) 333-5244; eFAX: (408) 904-4688 Alt Office Phone: (408) 997-6136; Cell: (408) 627-9606 -----Original Message----- From: brown_David1@emc.com [mailto:brown_David1@emc.com] Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2007 11:49 AM To: ips@ietf.org Subject: RE: FW: [Ips] Recent comments about FCoE and iSCSI How would an FCoE-based initiator communicate with iSCSI-based storage? In other words, can the same host adapter be used for FCoE connections and iSCSI sessions, and if so, would the performance be similar? thanks, dj ________________________________ From: John Hufferd [mailto:jhufferd@Brocade.COM] Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2007 12:52 AM To: Sandars, Ken; Eddy Quicksall; Julian Satran Cc: ips@ietf.org Subject: RE: FW: [Ips] Recent comments about FCoE and iSCSI Ken, The term FCoE has as its primary component FC. Consider the possibility that the DCE Link from the Host connects to a switch/device that is able to deal with the FC part of the FCoE. . . . John L Hufferd Sr. Executive Director of Technology jhufferd@brocade.com <mailto:jhufferd@brocade.com> Office Phone: (408) 333-5244; eFAX: (408) 904-4688 Alt Office Phone: (408) 997-6136; Cell: (408) 627-9606 ________________________________ From: Sandars, Ken [mailto:ken_sandars@adaptec.com] Sent: Wednesday, April 25, 2007 6:41 PM To: John Hufferd; Eddy Quicksall; Julian Satran Cc: ips@ietf.org Subject: RE: FW: [Ips] Recent comments about FCoE and iSCSI Hey John, [Hufferd] Many servers are asking for an evolutionary way to combine their Networking connections from the Server. The customers I have dealt with do NOT want to rip out FC, they want to provide a single Link for transport of all networking needs, including storage, exiting their servers. I'm not sure what you are saying here. Are you saying servers should have a single type of physical network connection, presumably ethernet? How does that align with not wanting to rip out FC? Thanks Ken _______________________________________________ Ips mailing list Ips@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ips _______________________________________________ Ips mailing list Ips@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ips
- Re: FW: [Ips] Recent comments about FCoE and iSCSI Eddy Quicksall
- [Ips] Recent comments about FCoE and iSCSI Julian Satran
- Re: FW: [Ips] Recent comments about FCoE and iSCSI Julian Satran
- Re: FW: [Ips] Recent comments about FCoE and iSCSI Eddy Quicksall
- Re: FW: [Ips] Recent comments about FCoE and iSCSI Julian Satran
- Re: FW: [Ips] Recent comments about FCoE and iSCSI Eddy Quicksall
- Re: FW: [Ips] Recent comments about FCoE and iSCSI Julian Satran
- Re: FW: [Ips] Recent comments about FCoE and iSCSI Eddy Quicksall
- RE: FW: [Ips] Recent comments about FCoE and iSCSI John Hufferd
- RE: FW: [Ips] Recent comments about FCoE and iSCSI Sandars, Ken
- RE: FW: [Ips] Recent comments about FCoE and iSCSI John Hufferd
- RE: FW: [Ips] Recent comments about FCoE and iSCSI Robert Snively
- Re: FW: [Ips] Recent comments about FCoE and iSCSI Silvano Gai
- Re: FW: [Ips] Recent comments about FCoE and iSCSI Julian Satran
- RE: FW: [Ips] Recent comments about FCoE and iSCSI Silvano Gai
- RE: FW: [Ips] Recent comments about FCoE and iSCSI brown_David1
- RE: FW: [Ips] Recent comments about FCoE and iSCSI Julian Satran
- RE: FW: [Ips] Recent comments about FCoE and iSCSI Silvano Gai
- RE: FW: [Ips] Recent comments about FCoE and iSCSI Frank D'Agostino (fdagosti)
- Re: FW: [Ips] Recent comments about FCoE and iSCSI Eddy Quicksall
- RE: FW: [Ips] Recent comments about FCoE and iSCSI John Hufferd
- RE: FW: [Ips] Recent comments about FCoE and iSCSI John Hufferd
- RE: FW: [Ips] Recent comments about FCoE and iSCSI Michael Krause
- RE: FW: [Ips] Recent comments about FCoE and iSCSI Silvano Gai
- Re: FW: [Ips] Recent comments about FCoE and iSCSI Eddy Quicksall
- RE: [Ips] Recent comments about FCoE and iSCSI Julian Satran
- RE: [Ips] Recent comments about FCoE and iSCSI Silvano Gai
- RE: [Ips] Recent comments about FCoE and iSCSI Larry Boucher
- RE: [Ips] Recent comments about FCoE and iSCSI Julian Satran
- RE: [Ips] Recent comments about FCoE and iSCSI Michael Krause
- RE: [Ips] Recent comments about FCoE and iSCSI Michael Krause
- RE: [Ips] Recent comments about FCoE and iSCSI Julian Satran
- RE: [Ips] Recent comments about FCoE and iSCSI Nicholas A. Bellinger