> +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!? 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 > mainstream transport like 'E' and its fair game and > easy to hack.
Maybe if it's in plain sight, it will more quickly evolve to become _less_ easy to hack. Anyway, by complete coincidence I was reading a few articles on FCoE the other day, and while most of them acknowledged the possibilities in using cheaper or faster (10Gb Ethernet) connectivity, there seemed to be two themes: (1) not routable, so only benefit is in more generic hardware (2) won't get anywhere, because SAN support teams won't want to give up or share authority or bodies with network support teams. Still, given the COMSTAR framework, I would guess that a software implementation might not be too difficult/expensive, and if so, might not need a huge base to be worthwhile. This message posted from opensolaris.org _______________________________________________ storage-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/storage-discuss
