From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: James Bottomley Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/10][RFC] linux-iscsi driver Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2005 09:47:43 -0600 Message-ID: <1105458463.3975.17.camel@mulgrave> References: <41E30855.9050203@cs.wisc.edu> <20050110232442.GB10138@infradead.org> <1105404318.4477.18.camel@mulgrave> <20050111095920.GA18119@infradead.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from stat16.steeleye.com ([209.192.50.48]:60806 "EHLO hancock.sc.steeleye.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S262807AbVAKPsP (ORCPT ); Tue, 11 Jan 2005 10:48:15 -0500 In-Reply-To: <20050111095920.GA18119@infradead.org> Sender: linux-scsi-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org To: Christoph Hellwig Cc: Mike Christie , SCSI Mailing List On Tue, 2005-01-11 at 09:59 +0000, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > For the time being I think iscsi-sfnet will do since there's still one > > other possible linux iscsi stack around. And we would probably have > > called our networking code ipv4-swansea if we also had an ipv4-bsd or > > something else one could use. > > > > In the long run, there will be only a single iscsi driver, and it can be > > renamed as such, but in the short term we're not ready to choose. > > I disagree. We have been concentrating on this driver for a long time, > everyone whoe thinks his driver should have been _the_ software initiator > should have complained for a long time. Well ... humour me. If there's no other stack suitable for submission within three months, this one can become iscsi and all later comers will have to modify it to add their features. James