<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: StorageVideoMojo</title>
	<atom:link href="http://storagemojo.com/2008/04/09/storagevideomojo/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://storagemojo.com/2008/04/09/storagevideomojo/</link>
	<description>Data storage info &#38; analysis</description>
	<pubDate>Wed, 09 Jul 2008 12:34:08 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Richard</title>
		<link>http://storagemojo.com/2008/04/09/storagevideomojo/#comment-189958</link>
		<dc:creator>Richard</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 13 Apr 2008 07:47:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://storagemojo.com/2008/04/09/storagevideomojo/#comment-189958</guid>
		<description>How do  you build a secure future on IB if there is only one source of silicon ? 
Remember, Intel pulled out long time ago. 
Why is everyone dismissing PCI Express ?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>How do  you build a secure future on IB if there is only one source of silicon ?<br />
Remember, Intel pulled out long time ago.<br />
Why is everyone dismissing PCI Express ?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: CBass</title>
		<link>http://storagemojo.com/2008/04/09/storagevideomojo/#comment-189027</link>
		<dc:creator>CBass</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 09 Apr 2008 18:16:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://storagemojo.com/2008/04/09/storagevideomojo/#comment-189027</guid>
		<description>Neat stuff. 

The scenes with your head were a bit dark, but overall very cool. Thanks.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Neat stuff. </p>
<p>The scenes with your head were a bit dark, but overall very cool. Thanks.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dan</title>
		<link>http://storagemojo.com/2008/04/09/storagevideomojo/#comment-188980</link>
		<dc:creator>Dan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 09 Apr 2008 14:13:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://storagemojo.com/2008/04/09/storagevideomojo/#comment-188980</guid>
		<description>Your take states that ease of management of 10Gbe is more important than the Infiniband performance. 

I have to disagree, since if you look at how IB is managed nowadays, you can hardly notice a difference compared to Ethernet. 
And with the future FCoE over IB, you'll even get a seamless integration with SANs.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Your take states that ease of management of 10Gbe is more important than the Infiniband performance. </p>
<p>I have to disagree, since if you look at how IB is managed nowadays, you can hardly notice a difference compared to Ethernet.<br />
And with the future FCoE over IB, you&#8217;ll even get a seamless integration with SANs.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ryan Malayter</title>
		<link>http://storagemojo.com/2008/04/09/storagevideomojo/#comment-188977</link>
		<dc:creator>Ryan Malayter</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 09 Apr 2008 14:07:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://storagemojo.com/2008/04/09/storagevideomojo/#comment-188977</guid>
		<description>The issue with Infiniband (and even FC for that matter) is that the economies of scale just aren't there. 
The idea of a universal datacenter interconnect is great, but right now that Universal interconnect is Gig-E. Every single device in our datacenter has a GigE port (or several). So I think any successor needs to be backwards compatible with that at the physical and management layer. 10GbE and 40GbE are the natural successors. I haven't heard a compelling argument as to why Ethernet needs to be thrown out the door.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The issue with Infiniband (and even FC for that matter) is that the economies of scale just aren&#8217;t there.<br />
The idea of a universal datacenter interconnect is great, but right now that Universal interconnect is Gig-E. Every single device in our datacenter has a GigE port (or several). So I think any successor needs to be backwards compatible with that at the physical and management layer. 10GbE and 40GbE are the natural successors. I haven&#8217;t heard a compelling argument as to why Ethernet needs to be thrown out the door.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Dynamic Page Served (once) in 0.217 seconds -->
