Date: Mon, 29 May 2006 17:51:28 -0600 From: Scott Long <scottl@samsco.org> To: Maxim Sobolev <sobomax@FreeBSD.org> Cc: "current@freebsd.org" <current@FreeBSD.org> Subject: Re: Importing iSCSI target from NetBSD Message-ID: <447B8900.4050603@samsco.org> In-Reply-To: <447B7CB7.5000000@FreeBSD.org> References: <447AB34C.4030509@sippysoft.com> <11410450515.20060529225555@lacave.net> <447B77AF.9060309@samsco.org> <447B7A55.7040704@FreeBSD.org> <447B7CB7.5000000@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Maxim Sobolev wrote: > Maxim Sobolev wrote: > >> Scott Long wrote: >> >>> F. Senault wrote: >>> >>>> Monday, May 29, 2006, 10:39:40 AM, you wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> I wonder if anybody has any objections to importing iSCSI target >>>>> daemon >>>>> from NetBSD (Intel) into the base. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Mh, I'm currently doing that, with the help of the author (Alistair G. >>>> Crooks), under the form of a port. Alistair just provided me a new >>>> version I'm testing, and I was planning to submit the port shortly. >>>> (It seems to work quite well). >>>> >>>> Now, if it's better to include it into the base, so much the better. >>>> Alistair was kind enough to take into consideration my suggestions, >>>> so, now, the daemon compiles and works under FreeBSD 6 (tested lightly >>>> with and i386 and more intensively witn an amd64). >>>> >>>> The work in progress is here : >>>> >>>> http://www.lacave.net/~fred/iscsi/ >>>> >>> >>> If it's not going to be integrated into the existing target >>> infrastructure then I'd prefer it to be a port. Ultimately it >>> would be nice for it to be part of the base system, though. >> >> >> Well, arguably we may want to support both ways. Having iSCSI target >> running in userland completely has some serious advantages (security >> is a big one for example, as you can run daemon easily as unprivileged >> process). The kernel iSCSI target only makes sense for really >> performance-constrained cases, and hopefully sooner or later we will >> be able to narrow the gap by utilizing zero-copy interfaces. > > > P.S. Just to make it clear - just consider running iSCSI over 100MBps > link or even a slower WAN links, which I think covers very large market > for this technology now. Performance constrain imposed by running in > userland is unlikely to be an issue at all. > > -Maxim Every company and group that I've talked to about iSCSI is worried about performance. In any case, please follow the lead of Mr. Senault and look at making this a port. Scott
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?447B8900.4050603>