>
> > But back on the main point, if implementing SCSI services over a
> > TCP connection is acceptable even though it does not use a kernel
> > socket, why would it not be acceptable to implement RDMA services
> > over a TCP connection without using a kernel socket?
>
> Because SCSI doesn't for
Jeff Garzik wrote:
> Caitlin Bestler wrote:
>> Jeff Garzik wrote:
>>> Caitlin Bestler wrote:
But hardware iSCSI implementations, which already exist, do not
work through normal sockets.
>
>>> No, they work through normal SCSI stack...
>
>> Correct.
>>
>> But they then interface to the
Caitlin Bestler wrote:
Jeff Garzik wrote:
Caitlin Bestler wrote:
But hardware iSCSI implementations, which already exist, do not work
through normal sockets.
No, they work through normal SCSI stack...
Correct.
But they then interface to the network using none of the network stack.
The no
Jeff Garzik wrote:
> Caitlin Bestler wrote:
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>> From: Steve Wise <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>> Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2006 09:54:57 -0500
>>>
Doesn't iSCSI have this same issue?
>>> Software iSCSI implementations don't have the issue because they go
>>> through the stack usin
Caitlin Bestler wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
From: Steve Wise <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2006 09:54:57 -0500
Doesn't iSCSI have this same issue?
Software iSCSI implementations don't have the issue because
they go through the stack using normal sockets and normal
device send and
On Wed, 2006-06-28 at 11:36 -0700, David Miller wrote:
> From: Steve Wise <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2006 09:54:57 -0500
>
> > Doesn't iSCSI have this same issue?
>
> Software iSCSI implementations don't have the issue because
> they go through the stack using normal sockets and norm
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> From: Steve Wise <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2006 09:54:57 -0500
>
>> Doesn't iSCSI have this same issue?
>
> Software iSCSI implementations don't have the issue because
> they go through the stack using normal sockets and normal
> device send and receive.
From: Steve Wise <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2006 09:54:57 -0500
> Doesn't iSCSI have this same issue?
Software iSCSI implementations don't have the issue because
they go through the stack using normal sockets and normal
device send and receive.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the
Herbert Xu wrote:
>
> Yes, however I think the same argument could be applied to TOE.
>
> With their RDMA NIC, we'll have TCP/SCTP connections that
> bypass netfilter, tc, IPsec, AF_PACKET/tcpdump and the rest
> of our stack while at the same time it is using the same IP
> address as us and deci
On Wed, 2006-06-28 at 15:35 +1000, Herbert Xu wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 27, 2006 at 09:43:23PM -0700, David Miller wrote:
> >
> > Socket state, and that is one thing I don't see them doing yet.
>
> I wonder what happens when the Linux TCP stack attempts to open a
> connection to a remote host when tha
On Wed, 2006-06-28 at 14:29 +1000, Herbert Xu wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 28, 2006 at 12:18:25AM -0400, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> >
> > A PCI device that presents itself as a SCSI controller, but under the
> > hood is really iSCSI-over-TCP smells like TOE. Running a virtualized
> > Linux guest on top of a
On Wed, 2006-06-28 at 15:35 +1000, Herbert Xu wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 27, 2006 at 09:43:23PM -0700, David Miller wrote:
> >
> > Socket state, and that is one thing I don't see them doing yet.
>
> I wonder what happens when the Linux TCP stack attempts to open a
> connection to a remote host when tha
On Wed, 2006-06-28 at 00:18 -0400, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> Herbert Xu wrote:
> > On Tue, Jun 27, 2006 at 11:24:25PM -0400, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> >> I don't see how that position has changed?
> >>
> >> http://linux-net.osdl.org/index.php/TOE
> >
> > Well I must say that RDMA over TCP smells very much l
From: Herbert Xu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2006 15:35:54 +1000
> With their RDMA NIC, we'll have TCP/SCTP connections that bypass
> netfilter, tc, IPsec, AF_PACKET/tcpdump and the rest of our stack
> while at the same time it is using the same IP address as us and
> deciding what packe
On Tue, Jun 27, 2006 at 09:43:23PM -0700, David Miller wrote:
>
> Socket state, and that is one thing I don't see them doing yet.
I wonder what happens when the Linux TCP stack attempts to open a
connection to a remote host when that connection is already open
in the RDMA NIC? For that matter wh
From: Herbert Xu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2006 14:29:59 +1000
> On Wed, Jun 28, 2006 at 12:18:25AM -0400, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> >
> > A PCI device that presents itself as a SCSI controller, but under the
> > hood is really iSCSI-over-TCP smells like TOE. Running a virtualized
> > L
Herbert Xu wrote:
On Wed, Jun 28, 2006 at 12:18:25AM -0400, Jeff Garzik wrote:
A PCI device that presents itself as a SCSI controller, but under the
hood is really iSCSI-over-TCP smells like TOE. Running a virtualized
Linux guest on top of a proprietary stack [which provides networking
servic
On Wed, Jun 28, 2006 at 12:18:25AM -0400, Jeff Garzik wrote:
>
> A PCI device that presents itself as a SCSI controller, but under the
> hood is really iSCSI-over-TCP smells like TOE. Running a virtualized
> Linux guest on top of a proprietary stack [which provides networking
> services to gue
18 matches
Mail list logo
