On lunedì 4 febbraio 2008, Linus Torvalds wrote:
quoted text
> So from a purely personal standpoint, I'd like to say that I'm not really
> interested in iSCSI (and I don't quite know why I've been cc'd on this
> whole discussion) and think that other approaches are potentially *much*
> better. So for example, I personally suspect that ATA-over-ethernet is way
> better than some crazy SCSI-over-TCP crap, but I'm biased for simple and
> low-level, and against those crazy SCSI people to begin with.

surely aoe is better than iscsi almost on performance because of the lesser 
protocol stack:
iscsi ->  scsi - ip - eth
aoe -> ata - eth

but surely iscsi is more a standard than aoe and is more actively used by 
real-world .

Other really useful feature are that:
- iscsi is capable to move to a ip based san scsi devices by routing that ( 
i've some tape changer routed by scst to some system that don't have other 
way to see a tape).
- because it work on the ip layer it can be routed between long distance , so 
having needed bandwidth you can have a really remote block device spoking a 
standard protocol between non ethereogenus systems.
- iscsi is now the cheapest san avaible.

bye,
marco.

--
unsubscribe notice
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/