RE: iFCP fabric attachments

[Joshua Tseng <jtseng@NishanSystems.com>]

Robert,

> 
> So the iFCP Gateway >>Must<< be the mast switch?
> 

Of course, there are certainly approaches you can take where
the iFCP gateway is the principal switch, but I would not say
this is a MUST.

Josh

> Joshua Tseng wrote:
> > 
> > Robert,
> > 
> > >
> > > I think this is a very interesting proposal, storage gateways are
> > > possible
> > > at several different levels, great work.
> > >
> > >  Section 3.3 says:
> > >     The gateway builds the store of N_PORT network addresses for
> > >     external devices in the IP fabric by:
> > >
> > >     a) Intercepting name service requests issued by 
> directly-attached
> > >        N_PORTs and redirecting them to the iSNS name server or,
> > >
> > >     b) Intercepting incoming N_PORT login requests from 
> external Fibre
> > >        Channel devices.
> > >
> > > Could you explain how this would work in the presence of existing
> > > Fibre Channel SNS and master switch?
> > >
> > > I noticed on your comparison of FCIP and iFCP that the SAN islands
> > > contain no Switches or Hubs, N_PORTS are connected 
> directly to iFCP
> > > devices. Is is possible under to have iFCP gateways and 
> FC switches?
> > >
> > 
> > Yes, it is possible for iFCP gateways to interoperate with 
> FC switches
> > if the iFCP gateway implements FC-SW-2.  Essentially, all 
> the N_PORTS
> > on the IP network would have to be represented to the FC 
> fabric through
> > mechanisms described in FC-SW-2.  Similarly, the iFCP gateway would
> > learn about FC devices in the FC fabric through the FC name server
> > mechanisms described in FC-GS-2 and FC-GS-3.  These devices 
> would then
> > be registered in the iSNS in the IP fabric.
> > 
> > Josh
>