David Weibel wrote: > +1 Solaris should always try to fill out its "enterprise" storage stack. > > A couple questions since I never followed FCoE that closely. Based on the > name it sounds like FCoE is going to have all the same flaws that AoE and > many other SCSIoE protocols have faced. It doesn't do routing!? FCoE is not routable, ant it is not for spanning distances. FCoE is for the data center that needs low latency, quality of service and so forth for good performance. > Also adding > the 'E' is going to make it less secure. One of the major reasons FC was > secure was it was on an obsecure hardware transport. You place it on > a mainstream transport like 'E' and its fair game and easy to hack. > I would say adding the 'E' makes FCoE less easy to hack since it stays behind routers. > > > This message posted from opensolaris.org > _______________________________________________ > storage-discuss mailing list > [email protected] > http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/storage-discuss >
_______________________________________________ storage-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/storage-discuss
