ethernet and switches, was Re: [rescue] Mozilla Firefox

[Dave McGuire]

On Apr 23, 2004, at 2:52 PM, Eric Dittman wrote:
>>>>    Wow, too many incarnations, reimplementations, small 
>>>> modifications.
>>>>    It's been reinvented multiple times with each increase in 
>>>> "speed".
>>>>    I think they've reached their limit and ought to start over 
>>>> fresh.
>>>
>>> By that argument SCSI sucks, too.
>>
>>    I agree with the basic point you're making, but SCSI was designed 
>> to
>> be scalable in the first place.
>
> Not when it was known as SASI.  As for the protocol itself, look at the
> problems with multiple LUNs, vendor-specific extensions for non-disk
> devices, etc. that cause incompatibilities and the need for blacklists
> and whitelists in the driver and application code.  Even though there
> are better storage methods available, we still use SCSI because it 
> works
> despite the workarounds that sometimes are necessary.

   True, but SASI was the crufty, proprietary Shugart-designed 
interconnect.  When they grabbed it and turned it into SCSI, a fair 
number of changes were made, such that SCSI is largely incompatible 
with SASI.  They are related, but we can't really say they're the same 
thing.

         -Dave

--
Dave McGuire          "PC users only know two 'solutions'...
Cape Coral, FL          reboot and upgrade."    -Jonathan Patschke