From owner-freebsd-questions  Mon Dec 20 22: 1:23 1999
Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Received: from mail2.uniserve.com (mail2.uniserve.com [204.244.156.7])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AE0B315385
	for <questions@freebsd.org>; Mon, 20 Dec 1999 22:01:21 -0800 (PST)
	(envelope-from tom@uniserve.com)
Received: from shell.uniserve.ca ([204.244.186.218])
	by mail2.uniserve.com with smtp (Exim 3.03 #4)
	id 120IMH-00079k-00; Mon, 20 Dec 1999 22:01:17 -0800
Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 22:01:11 -0800 (PST)
From: Tom <tom@uniserve.com>
X-Sender: tom@shell.uniserve.ca
To: Carl Makin <carl@xena.aipo.gov.au>
Cc: questions@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: FibreChannel, FC-Al and NetApp.
In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.4.21.9912211416540.15902-100000@newton.aipo.gov.au>
Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.02A.9912202155550.2093-100000@shell.uniserve.ca>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG
Precedence: bulk
X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG

On Tue, 21 Dec 1999, Carl Makin wrote:

> 
> Is anyone using FC, FC-AL or NetApp filers on a FreeBSD 3.x-STABLE system?
> 
> I'm very interested in some real world comparisons of the various
> technologies.

  FC-AL and NetApps are hardly comparable.  FC-AL is just a new media for
SCSI (FC-AL uses the SCSI protocol).  It is just real fast (100MB/s),
supports lots of simultaneous devices, and supports autonegotiation.  In
fact NetApp filers uses FC-AL to connect disk shelves to the head unit.

> Carl.

Tom



To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message