hi, what do you guys proposed that a SAN without fibre channel but
using ATA, Ultra SCSI as its connection?

[ Post a follow-up to this message ]

yls177 wrote:
> hi, what do you guys proposed that a SAN without fibre channel but
> using ATA, Ultra SCSI as its connection?

That's not a SAN.  SCSI works well direct attached, but is not
a network wide protocol.  HOWEVER, iSCSI is and if you meant iSCSI,
then yes, this can replace fibre channel SAN.  You'll want to
make sure that you get TOE enabled iSCSI ethernet boards (to avoid
performance issues).

There is also AoE (ATA over Ethernet).  You can check out
www.coraid.com for more info as they are the only implementor
AFAIK.  The coraid stuff is supported by Linux. AoE is network
aware but not routable.  If you need network aware and routable
(e.g. internet available), then you're better off with iSCSI.

[ Post a follow-up to this message ]

Chris Cox <notccox@notairmail.net> wrote in message news:<cil6u6$cje@library1.airnews.net>..
.
> yls177 wrote: 
>
> That's not a SAN.  SCSI works well direct attached, but is not
> a network wide protocol.  HOWEVER, iSCSI is and if you meant iSCSI,
> then yes, this can replace fibre channel SAN.  You'll want to
> make sure that you get TOE enabled iSCSI ethernet boards (to avoid
> performance issues).
>
> There is also AoE (ATA over Ethernet).  You can check out
> www.coraid.com for more info as they are the only implementor
> AFAIK.  The coraid stuff is supported by Linux. AoE is network
> aware but not routable.  If you need network aware and routable
> (e.g. internet available), then you're better off with iSCSI.


Hi, i am thinking about the different types of connections to SAN. Are
the below the 2 main categories?

1) server  ->  SAN switch -> SAN

2) server -> LAN -> SAN

[ Post a follow-up to this message ]

yls177 wrote:
> Chris Cox <notccox@notairmail.net> wrote in message news:<cil6u6$cje@libra
ry1.airnews.net>...
> 
>
>
>
> Hi, i am thinking about the different types of connections to SAN. Are
> the below the 2 main categories?
>
> 1) server  ->  SAN switch -> SAN
>
> 2) server -> LAN -> SAN

1 is ok.

iSCSI is usually on its own network and really needs it's own
type of network card (one with TOE for performance reasons).
So even 2 will look a lot  like 1 (if 2 was supposed to be iSCSI).

2) server -> Seperate IP network -> switch -> iSCSI SAN

Nice thing about iSCSI is that it is routable IP based.  So you
can connect to a disk across the internet.

It's possible to run iSCSI over your existing IP net... but
I don't recommend it (it's kind of a hog).

[ Post a follow-up to this message ]