RE: Question

["shesha bhushan" <bhushan_vadulas@hotmail.com>]

If we assumme that we are transferring scsi packets over the local LAN where 
there is no congestion, can we actually send the packets only on IP ???? I 
have read thru the some doccuments. But i havent got a clear picture. can 
you also suggest me how to go about in this ?????

Thanks
Shesha Bhushan S
Research Assistant
Arizona State University



>From: "Sukanta Ganguly" <sganguly@opulentsystems.com>
>Reply-To: sganguly@opulentsystems.com
>To: somesh_gupta@silverbacksystems.com,   "shesha bhushan" 
><bhushan_vadulas@hotmail.com>, "IPS" <ips@ece.cmu.edu>
>Subject: RE: Question
>Date: Thu, 25 Oct 2001 07:21:06 -0700
>
>Well TCP's congestion control will still be functional but the the iSCSI 
>cannot make much use of it as it sits at a higher layer than TCP. What 
>really is required is a congestion control within the iSCSI layer and run 
>it over plain IP, that would be the most efficient way of doing it. I agree 
>to that some amount of TCP like congestion control will be built into iSCSI 
>but will be much less than the overheads of the TCP layer (their are 
>multiple ways of achieving reliability and congestion avoidance on UDP), 
>and also will make useful sense for the iSCSI layer.
>   I don't know whether it is too late of not, cause I see many companies 
>spending a huge amount of money doing TCP offloads. According to them iSCSI 
>is going to benefit out of it. Yeah it make the un-optimal way of doing 
>SCSI over IP a little more fast by having a dedicated processor, but is it 
>the most optimal way of doing the work ????
>   I have nothing against TCP offload. but lets have a good iSCSI solution 
>rather than patching up a unoptimal one.
>
>SG
>
>
>*********** REPLY SEPARATOR  ***********
>
>On 10/24/2001 at 2:25 PM Somesh Gupta wrote:
>
> >The question is not crazy at all (the answer
> >might be :-)). New protocols are required (and
> >really should for everyone's benefit) implement
> >some congestion avoidance mechanism.
> >
> >Currently the easiest way to achieve this is to
> >use TCP. Unfortunately we do not depend enough
> >on it, leading to significant complexity
> >in the protocol.
> >
> >Somesh
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: owner-ips@ece.cmu.edu [mailto:owner-ips@ece.cmu.edu]On Behalf Of
> >> shesha bhushan
> >> Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2001 6:39 PM
> >> To: ips@ece.cmu.edu
> >> Subject: Question
> >>
> >>
> >> Hi,
> >>   I am doing a research project at Arizona State University on SCSI and
> >> iSCSI. I was going through both the protocols. I have a crazy question.
> >> iSCSI = SCSI/(TCP/IP). But SCSI is a reliable protocol so is TCP.
> >> so can't
> >> we just try to send SCSI packets on IP or SCSI/UDP. Any & All
> >> comments are
> >> welcome.
> >>
> >> Thanks
> >> Shesha Bhushan S
> >> Research Assistant
> >> Arizona State University
> >>
> >>
> >> _________________________________________________________________
> >> Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at
> >http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp
> >>
> >>
>
>
>


_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp