[Open-FCoE] FYI : Re: Setup question

P Mumbai mumbai.prasanna at gmail.com
Tue Sep 23 04:55:23 UTC 2008

Hi All,
Today (9/22), in a FCoE session during the Storage Developer
Conference, it was said that Point 2 Point, between FCoE initiator and
target, is not supported in the first FCoE standard (FC-BB-5), and it
will be considered for next version of FCoE standard.

My questions are:

1.	First, I'd like to confirm this, and then anyone in the community
knows why P2P is not in the first version of FCoE Standard? Any
technical reasons?  Is this the reason that P2P mode as discussed in
the below mails is not working?
2.	If i move to the earlier FCoE code(before re-architecture)  will it
be working, what standard does it follow?
3.	If there is no standard, and implementations are out there, I would
be concern about interoperability. How do people the community look at

If this is not the mailing list to talk about all these questions,
please excuse me and point me to the correct mailing list.

Thanks You all in advance.


On Tue, Sep 16, 2008 at 6:09 AM, Mithlesh Thukral
<mithlesh at linsyssoft.com> wrote:
> Seems like P2P open FCoE is broken for now.
> Regards,
> Mithlesh Thukral
> On Saturday 13 September 2008 02:17:13 am charles zhuang wrote:
>> Robert,
>> Seems the p2p mode between initiator and sw target is broken for the
>> re-architecture code, I likely to know how do you guys test the
>> initiator when you do the re-arch? Does it have to go thru a fcgw or a
>> real switch fabric? Is there other easy way that I can get this set up
>> with a connection like before?
>> Thanks again for your help.
>> charles
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Robert Love [mailto:robert.w.love at linux.intel.com]
>> Sent: Thursday, September 11, 2008 6:20 PM
>> To: charles zhuang
>> Cc: devel at open-fcoe.org
>> Subject: Re: [Open-FCoE] Setup question
>> On Thu, 2008-09-11 at 16:26 -0500, charles zhuang wrote:
>> <snip>
>> > Also, on the initiator, I don't have openfc.ko, I only have fcoe.ko,
>> > libfc.ko, scsi_transport_fc.ko, and scsi_mod.ko. Did I miss anything?
>> >
>> > 2. By following the quick start on initiator, my initiator system
>> > doesn't have fcconf. I guess I can use the same procedure on the
>> target
>> > quick start guide to build/install fcconf and hbaapi. I don't need
>> > openfctgt and scst. Is it correct?
>> fcconf was our user application before our re-architecture (the process
>> that converted openfc.ko to libfc.ko). We had to remove fcconf because
>> it was getting information from the kernel in the wrong way. We've made
>> a small application fcoeadm that will create/destroy and soon we'll be
>> adding code to report information like what fcconf did.
>> git clone git://open-fcoe.org/openfc/open-fcoe.git
>> You will need to use fcconf for the target because the target is based
>> on our pre-architecture.
>> Unfortunately my guess is that point-to-point mode is broken for the
>> re-architecture code (the initiator), but I don't know for sure. It's
>> been untested for some time.
>> > Thanks very much for your help.
>> >
>> > charles
>> >
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > devel mailing list
>> > devel at open-fcoe.org
>> > http://www.open-fcoe.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
>> _______________________________________________
>> devel mailing list
>> devel at open-fcoe.org
>> http://www.open-fcoe.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
> _______________________________________________
> devel mailing list
> devel at open-fcoe.org
> http://www.open-fcoe.org/mailman/listinfo/devel

More information about the devel mailing list