Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: Scheduled Transfer Protocol on Linux | Date | Sun, 13 Feb 2000 19:37:42 -0500 | From | "Brandon S. Allbery KF8NH" <> |
| |
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/
| |