To: Douglas Nordgren who wrote (1828 ) 2/12/2000 2:44:00 PM From: Joe Wagner Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 4808
Good find! I like this part from the article: "If Gigabit Ethernet were chosen, it would be necessary for a bridge/controller to convert traffic for storage I/O. If Fibre Channel is chosen, storage, network, and cluster communications could all be carried over a single transport. It is likely that a bridging function would be needed between Fibre Channel and Ethernet, but notice that the IP component would not have to be transformed." FC being selected, would give FC a big long term advantage over GE going forward. Since FC would cover storage, network and clusters, it would put GE at a small disadvantage initially, but that would grow and mushroom into a huge disadvantage over time. GE could become a legacy network over time and the real action would be happening in Fibre Channel. I see Troika Networks is mentioned in the article: "While cluster I/O has several protocols available, the one most interesting for System I/O is the virtual interface architecture (VIA) protocol developed initially by Compaq, Intel, and Microsoft and now supported broadly within the industry. While VIA could be used for many things, it is directly targeted at low-latency cluster communications for such things as heartbeat and distributed-locking applications. Work is currently underway in the Fibre Channel community to complete the upper layer protocol (ULP) mapping for VIA-over-Fibre Channel (FC/VI). Whether it is a trend remains to be seen, but in September 1999, Troika Networks announced the first host bus adapter that supports the three Fibre Channel upper layer protocols mentioned above (FCP, FC/IP, and FC/VI)."