> > UDI is not a standard and seem to me some poor sci-fi and will never
> > happen in my systems.
>
> I just browse http://www.projectudi.org/ and find out that Intel already
> porting UDI in Linux as proof of concept.
That doesn't mean anyone in the Linux community considers UDI a serious
exercise.
> 1. support by major vendors like Sun, HP, IBM and Compaq (which buyout DEC and
> abandon CAM).
Vendors and clues don't go hand in hand. FreeBSD has more clues than all the
vendors put together and a lot less marketing reasons to choose stuff their
"friends" say they should. FreeBSD SCSI is rather nicely done.
> 2. Intel is porting UDI for Linux now!
And people are porting cobol compilers. Neither is a good idea.
> 3. UDI support SCSI-3 (including Fibre Channel)...Do CAM support that?
Of course it can, and ultra-3 LVD and all the rest. It also does it without
throwing your latency and performance out of the window.
Alan
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-scsi" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
