Date: 06 Mar 2003 09:24:50 +1030 From: "Daniel O'Connor" <doconnor@gsoft.com.au> To: "Cagle, John " "(ISS-Houston)" <john.cagle@hp.com> Cc: David Leimbach <leimy2k@mac.com>, freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: RE: IP over IEEE1394? Message-ID: <1046904890.66086.10.camel@chowder.gsoft.com.au> In-Reply-To: <C50AB9511EE59B49B2A503CB7AE1ABD10476C011@cceexc19.americas.cpqcorp.net> References: <C50AB9511EE59B49B2A503CB7AE1ABD10476C011@cceexc19.americas.cpqcorp.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, 2003-03-06 at 01:06, Cagle, John (ISS-Houston) wrote: > Wouldn't you need a firewire switch to do a cluster of more than 2 > nodes? Or are you thinking of using multiple firewire interfaces per > node? Firewire supports daisy chaining devices, and multiple masters. I have done laptop -> firewire hd -> desktop PC and used the drive on one machine and setup a network between the two of them :) fwcontrol -t shows bus topology. -- Daniel O'Connor software and network engineer for Genesis Software - http://www.gsoft.com.au "The nice thing about standards is that there are so many of them to choose from." -- Andrew Tanenbaum GPG Fingerprint - 9A8C 569F 685A D928 5140 AE4B 319B 41F4 5D17 FDD5 To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?1046904890.66086.10.camel>