Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756559AbYBEE4T (ORCPT ); Mon, 4 Feb 2008 23:56:19 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1750872AbYBEE4F (ORCPT ); Mon, 4 Feb 2008 23:56:05 -0500 Received: from garbage.rmnet.it ([82.145.99.230]:46401 "EHLO garbage.rmnet.it" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750870AbYBEE4C (ORCPT ); Mon, 4 Feb 2008 23:56:02 -0500 X-Greylist: delayed 650 seconds by postgrey-1.27 at vger.kernel.org; Mon, 04 Feb 2008 23:56:01 EST User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/11.3.6.070618 Date: Tue, 05 Feb 2008 05:43:10 +0100 Subject: Re: [Scst-devel] Integration of SCST in the mainstream Linux kernel From: Matteo Tescione To: Linus Torvalds , Matt Mackall CC: Mike Christie , Vladislav Bolkhovitin , , Linux Kernel Mailing List , "Nicholas A. Bellinger" , James Bottomley , , Andrew Morton , FUJITA Tomonori , Alan Cox Message-ID: Thread-Topic: [Scst-devel] Integration of SCST in the mainstream Linux kernel Thread-Index: AchnsZsn2fwOENOkEdyg7QAZ4zZdpQ== In-Reply-To: Mime-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-RMnet-garbage-MailScanner: Found to be clean X-RMnet-garbage-MailScanner-SpamCheck: non spam, SpamAssassin (punteggio=-1.799, necessario 4.5, autolearn=not spam, ALL_TRUSTED -1.80, BAYES_50 0.00) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2268 Lines: 65 Hi all, And sorry for intrusion, i am not a developer but i work everyday with iscsi and i found it fantastic. Altough Aoe, Fcoe and so on could be better, we have to look in real world implementations what is needed *now*, and if we look at vmware world, virtual iron, microsoft clustering etc, the answer is iSCSI. And now, SCST is the best open-source iSCSI target. So, from an end-user point of view, what are the really problems to not integrate scst in the mainstream kernel? Just my two cent, -- So long and thank for all the fish -- #Matteo Tescione #RMnet srl > > > On Mon, 4 Feb 2008, Matt Mackall wrote: >> >> But ATAoE is boring because it's not IP. Which means no routing, >> firewalls, tunnels, congestion control, etc. > > The thing is, that's often an advantage. Not just for performance. > >> NBD and iSCSI (for all its hideous growths) can take advantage of these >> things. > > .. and all this could equally well be done by a simple bridging protocol > (completely independently of any AoE code). > > The thing is, iSCSI does things at the wrong level. It *forces* people to > use the complex protocols, when it's a known that a lot of people don't > want it. > > Which is why these AoE and FCoE things keep popping up. > > It's easy to bridge ethernet and add a new layer on top of AoE if you need > it. In comparison, it's *impossible* to remove an unnecessary layer from > iSCSI. > > This is why "simple and low-level is good". It's always possible to build > on top of low-level protocols, while it's generally never possible to > simplify overly complex ones. > > Linus > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- > This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft > Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008. > http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/ > _______________________________________________ > Scst-devel mailing list > Scst-devel@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/scst-devel > -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/