Re: Scheduled Transfer Protocol on Linux

From: Brandon S. Allbery KF8NH (allbery@kf8nh.apk.net)
Date: Sun Feb 13 2000 - 19:37:42 EST


In message <E12K9MA-0004CF-00@the-village.bc.nu>, Alan Cox writes:
+-----
| Its actually kind of the other way around. A modern IDE drive is a cut down
| SCSI drive and firmware with some legacy mode glue added. ATAPI is most of
+--->8

True, ATAPI re-added most of the intelligence IDE was invented to cut
away....

| > with STP networking differ only in that they're potentially a little more
| > general, and that you need to use slightly newer (but common) hardware and
| > code to implement it.
|
| SCSI as a networking protocol is possible but needs a carrier layer. Thats
+--->8

Hm, I'm not being sufficiently general in my comments, I guess. I wasn't
intending to imply that SCSI was a full-blown network protocol, just that
it's complex enough to be equivalent to one in terms of the infrastructure
required to support it.

-- 
brandon s. allbery	   os/2,linux,solaris,perl	allbery@kf8nh.apk.net
system administrator	   kthkrb,heimdal,gnome,rt	  allbery@ece.cmu.edu
carnegie mellon / electrical and computer engineering			kf8nh
    We are Linux. Resistance is an indication that you missed the point.

- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Feb 15 2000 - 21:00:26 EST