linux-kernel - Re: [Scst-devel] Integration of SCST in the mainstream Linux kernel

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Tue, 05 Feb 2008 05:43:10 +0100
From:	Matteo Tescione <matteo@...et.it>
To:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Matt Mackall <mpm@...enic.com>
CC:	Mike Christie <michaelc@...wisc.edu>,
	Vladislav Bolkhovitin <vst@...b.net>,
	<linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"Nicholas A. Bellinger" <nab@...ux-iscsi.org>,
	James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...senPartnership.com>,
	<scst-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	FUJITA Tomonori <fujita.tomonori@....ntt.co.jp>,
	Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Subject: Re: [Scst-devel] Integration of SCST in the mainstream Linux
 kernel

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@...ts.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@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/