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

[Eric Dittman]

> > 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.  
> 
> Isn't that mostly because manufacturer violate the specs and create
> their own rather than using public discussion to create needed additions
> and changes?

The manufacturers didn't want to have a public discussion before because
they wanted to be first on the market (in most cases, and this still
happens today).

> > Even though there are better storage methods available, we still use
> > SCSI because it works despite the workarounds that sometimes are
> > necessary.
> 
> What is better?  I've not seen much of an alternative to IDE and SCSI
> presented, and still less is put on the market.
> 
> I just wish SCSI were cheaper, and they'd quit shoving IDE down our
> throats.

Most big companies use some kind of FC SAN.  If you buy stuff off eBay
FC is also affordable for home since FC disks seem to be inexpensive.
The only thing you'd need would be a FC backplane (or use T-cards) to
connect the drives.

The new SATA and serial SCSI look interesting since SATA uses the SCSI
command set (and IIRC can be connected to serial SCSI controllers, but
I could have that backwards).  The only drawback with SATA is the one
drive/controller limit.
-- 
Eric Dittman
dittman at dittman.net