[Ksummit-2008-discuss] Kernel Summit Request for Discussion: The Future of Target mode and Cloud storage on Linux

Nicholas A. Bellinger nab at linux-iscsi.org
Wed Aug 20 19:26:44 PDT 2008


On Wed, 2008-08-20 at 21:07 -0500, James Bottomley wrote:
> On Wed, 2008-08-20 at 18:43 -0700, Nicholas A. Bellinger wrote:
> > On Thu, 2008-08-21 at 10:40 +0900, FUJITA Tomonori wrote:
> > > On Wed, 20 Aug 2008 18:26:13 -0700
> > > "Nicholas A. Bellinger" <nab at linux-iscsi.org> wrote:
> > > 
> > > > > > Yes there is another, IET, the one that has been included into a few
> > > > > > distributions, and who's iSCSI logic has been included into other
> > > > > > projects.
> > > > > 
> > > > > I think that Debian and Suse have already replaced IET with STGT.
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > Well, are redhat.com and suse.com services running on top of fabric from
> > > > either IET or STGT yet..?  Linux-iSCSI.org services are, as will be
> > > > running on top of open source storage cloud as we move towards VHACS
> > > > v1.0.
> > > 
> > > Sorry, I don't understand what you mean. Why does redhat.com and
> > > suse.com services need to run on 'cloud' technology?
> > > 
> > > You said that IET has been included into some distributions so I just
> > > pointed out that some of them include STGT instead of IET now.
> > > 
> > 
> > Sorry Tomo-san, it was a small jab at the fact that STGT is not being
> > used recommended for production usage, and I am guessing that those
> > websites would rather run on fancy storage arrays with closed IP storage
> > stacks (I had no idea what they are using btw), instead of running on
> > top of their own target mode stack that they ship (as Linux-iSCSI.org
> > does).
> > 
> > See, comedy is much easier in face-to-face discussions.
> 
> Which is precisely the damn point ...  while the only interest is in
> petty points scoring along the lines of "mine is better than yours"
> we're never going to make any progress.
> 

I am not arguing mine is better than anyones, I am just simply trying to
make the point about the NEED for generic kernel level target mode for
all of us to focus out efforts on a single codebase, and the steps to go
about achieving that.

I don't see how bringing up the fact that some of these stacks that are
being discussed are being used in production or not is a petty point.  

But my apologies for offending anyone's infrastructure.


> Now if you need me to bash heads together I'd be happy to do that at the
> plumbers conf ... we already have a storage Micro Conference, no less.
> However, taking up a KS discussion slot for this is just going to bore
> 90% of the audience and achieve less than a discussion amongst the
> storage stakeholders has the potential to .... although if the latter
> degenerates into a "mine's better than yours" type discussion it will
> also turn out to be pointless.
> 

Again, I have never advocating my code going upstream as is, I am just
just one of the few who is not beholden to storage vendor interests,
running a self hosted target mode storage project, a core developer of a
storage cloud based exclusively on Linux and Open Source Tech, and am
only interested in seeing the best code (not mine persay) become part of
the Linux kernel.

Nothing more, nothing less.

--nab

> James
> 
> 
> 



More information about the Ksummit-2008-discuss mailing list