Re: Scheduled Transfer Protocol on Linux

From: Jean-Michel Pittet (jmp@gandalf.engr.sgi.com)
Date: Mon Feb 14 2000 - 01:11:55 EST

Next message: Rusty Russell: "Re: getting more that 4K out of a proc file? [PATCH]"
Previous message: Jens Axboe: "eepro100 not working properly"
In reply to: Matti Aarnio: "Re: Scheduled Transfer Protocol on Linux"
Next in thread: Jeremy Fitzhardinge: "Re: Scheduled Transfer Protocol on Linux"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

> How exactly would STP interface differ from FC ?
> E.g. how STP would be better than FC ?

STP is a transport layer protocol which is independent of the lower
layer physical medium as opposed to FC which is ... well a physical
layer medium.

There is SCSI over FC and as Aman pointed out in his post, we are working
on SCSI over STP (Genroco demo'ed a proto at CERN last October).

Cheers
JM

-- -----8<----- Jean-Michel Pittet jmp@sgi.com Phone:650-933-6149 Fax:933-3542 SGI, 1600 Amphitheatre Parkway, MS 802, Mountain View, CA, 94043 USA

- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Next message: Rusty Russell: "Re: getting more that 4K out of a proc file? [PATCH]"
Previous message: Jens Axboe: "eepro100 not working properly"
In reply to: Matti Aarnio: "Re: Scheduled Transfer Protocol on Linux"
Next in thread: Jeremy Fitzhardinge: "Re: Scheduled Transfer Protocol on Linux"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Feb 15 2000 - 21:00:26 EST