OSD in review - February, 2002

Samarra, Ken Ken.Samarra at lotstech.com
Mon Feb 25 09:11:55 PST 2002


* From the T10 Reflector (t10 at t10.org), posted by:
* "Samarra, Ken" <Ken.Samarra at lotstech.com>
*
This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand
this format, some or all of this message may not be legible.

------_=_NextPart_001_01C1BE1F.86B0EC90
Content-Type: text/plain

Certainly there is no reason why OSD couldn't be used as a common file
system format for "sneaker-netting" with removable media, however the
intended use really is to fix the interoperability & management problems
we are having with SANs due to an outdated storage design.

By "outdated", I mean that operating systems think they exclusively own
the SAN devices they are attached to; and tape drives, disk drives, and
libraries aren't typically aware they are being used by different hosts.
Today, we write a tangle of workarounds to compensate for this old
"direct attach" approach.

OSD (Object-based Storage Devices) will solve this by moving the
"intelligence" out of the operating system, and into the device itself.
The potential here is enormous, as once this mechanism is in place, the
following list of possibilities will present itself:

1. True Heterogeneous attaches (i.e. Solaris and Windows can access the
same data on the same device simultaneously) 
2. Server-less backups (disk talks directly to tape without the server) 
3. Dynamically growing RAID (just add more disk) 
4. Library sharing between different backup & archive applications 
5. Devices manage themselves, as the metadata resides on them 
6. Intelligent pooling of storage resources (no virtualization
required!) 
7. ... 

The list goes on and on... 

Many in our industry think objectizing storage devices will return the
same boons that the software industry received when object-oriented
programming became prevalent over the last decade.

Here's a link to an article that discusses this more in depth: 

http://is.pennnet.com/Articles/Article_Display.cfm?Section=Archives
<http://is.pennnet.com/Articles/Article_Display.cfm?Section=Archives&Sub
section=Display&ARTICLE_ID=81800&KEYWORD=samarra>
&Subsection=Display&ARTICLE_ID=81800&KEYWORD=samarra 


If you like, please join us on the OSD T10 Reflector by sending email to
Majordomo at t10.org with the following in the body:

subscribe osd youremail at yourcompany.com 


Sincerely, 

Kenneth Samarra 
Chief SAN Architect 
LOTS Technology, Inc. 
1751 S Fordham St, Suite 100 
Longmont, CO 80503 
(720) 652-4527 







-----Original Message----- 
From: Pat LaVarre [ mailto:LAVARRE at iomega.com
 ] 
Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2002 3:19 PM 
To: t10 at t10.org 
Subject: RE: OSD in review - February, 2002 

* From the T10 Reflector (t10 at t10.org), posted by: 
* "Pat LaVarre" <LAVARRE at iomega.com> 
* 
Thanks for these hints ... I ended up at <
http://www.snia.org/English/Work_Groups/OSD/index.html
<http://www.snia.org/English/Work_Groups/OSD/index.html> >, which,
ignorant as I am, I'd summarise as:

"... With OSD, file servers can be designed in such a way that they
continue to own and manage the storage but do not necessarily serve the
data, effectively becoming only file managers ...

"... interoperability is achieved because many of the system-specific
storage management routines are moved down into the device ...

8 Members by name: "(Intel Labs, co-chair) ... (Ciprico, co-chair) ...
(Sun) ... (StorageTek) ... (Seagate) ... (MTI) ... (HP Labs) ...
(StorageTek)."

"In the near term ... 
T10 Standardization of SCSI extensions to support OSD commands. 
IETF iSCSI Requirements for OSD commands. 
Aggregation and virtualization of OSD devices. 
Application of OSD in file systems and databases. 

"Recent Accomplishments  ... 
January 2002 - - SNIA Symposium Organizing Meeting (join us!) 
November 2001 - - Work Group Kickstart 
February 2000 - - established SNIA and T10 collaboration 
October 1999 - - Work Group Kickoff 

Pat LaVarre 

>>> "Carrier, John" <John_Carrier at adaptec.com> 02/20/02 02:53PM >>> 
There is an OSD implementation effort underway at SNIA.  The co-chairs
of 
the workgroup are Michael Mesnier [michael.mesnier at intel.com] and Tom
Ruwart 
[tmruwart at ciprico.com]. Though they sometimes cross-post to the T10
site, 
the workgroup maintains a separate mailing list at SNIA. 

--jc 

> -----Original Message----- 
> From: Pat LaVarre [ mailto:LAVARRE at iomega.com
 ] 
> Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2002 9:07 AM 
> To: 
> Subject: OSD in review - February, 2002 
> 
> 
> * From the T10 Reflector (t10 at t10.org), posted by: 
> * "Pat LaVarre" <LAVARRE at iomega.com> 
> * 
> > "Elliott, Robert" <Robert.Elliott at COMPAQ.com> 02/19/02 12:51PM 
> > ... 
> > You may want to peruse the OSD command set, 
> > which has lots of long CDBs 
> > and discusses using bidirectional for its CREATE command. 
> 
> Thanks for this pointer. 
> 
> How live/dead is this OSD effort?  Is it here that people 
> discuss it?  Anybody out there actually implementing this protocol? 
> 
> I ask because I hear above the 2GiB limit of FAT-16 LFN 
> people don't have a commonly agreed standard for 
> sneaker-netting filesystems between platforms. 
> 
> At first glance, I'd say T10 OSD is a form of Ftp over Scsi 
> ... which is interesting for efforts like file exchange for 
> peer-to-peer Usb (aka Usb OTG = On The Go). 
> 
> Pat LaVarre 
... 


* 
* For T10 Reflector information, send a message with 
* 'info t10' (no quotes) in the message body to majordomo at t10.org 


------_=_NextPart_001_01C1BE1F.86B0EC90
Content-Type: text/html
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN">

RE: OSD in review - February, 2002 Certainly there is no reason why OSD couldn't be used = as a common file system format for ;sneaker-netting; with = removable media, however the intended use really is to fix the = interoperability & management problems we are having with SANs due = to an outdated storage design. By ;outdated;, I mean that operating = systems think they exclusively own the SAN devices they are attached = to; and tape drives, disk drives, and libraries aren't typically aware = they are being used by different hosts. Today, we write a tangle of = workarounds to compensate for this old ;direct attach; = approach. OSD (Object-based Storage Devices) will solve this by = moving the ;intelligence; out of the operating system, and = into the device itself. The potential here is enormous, as once this = mechanism is in place, the following list of possibilities will present = itself: 1. True Heterogeneous attaches (i.e. Solaris and = Windows can access the same data on the same device = simultaneously) 
2. Server-less backups (disk talks directly to tape = without the server) 
3. Dynamically growing RAID (just add more = disk) 
4. Library sharing between different backup & = archive applications 
5. Devices manage themselves, as the metadata = resides on them 
6. Intelligent pooling of storage resources (no = virtualization required!) 
7. ... The list goes on and on... Many in our industry think objectizing storage = devices will return the same boons that the software industry received = when object-oriented programming became prevalent over the last = decade. Here's a link to an article that discusses this more = in depth: http://is.pennnet.com/Articles/Article_Display.cfm?Sec= tion=3DArchivesa 
If you like, please join us on the OSD T10 Reflector = by sending email to Majordomo at t10.org with the following in the = body: subscribe osd youremail at yourcompany.com 
Sincerely, Kenneth Samarra 
Chief SAN Architect 
LOTS Technology, Inc. 
1751 S Fordham St, Suite 100 
Longmont, CO 80503 
(720) 652-4527 





-----Original Message----- 
From: Pat LaVarre [mailto:LAVARRE at iomega.com] = 
Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2002 3:19 PM 
To: t10 at t10.org 
Subject: RE: OSD in review - February, 2002 * From the T10 Reflector (t10 at t10.org), posted = by: 
* ;Pat LaVarre; = <LAVARRE at iomega.com> 
* 
Thanks for these hints ... I ended up at <http://www.snia.org/English/Work_Groups/OSD/index.html= >, which, ignorant as I am, I'd summarise as: ;... With OSD, file servers can be designed in = such a way that they continue to own and manage the storage but do not = necessarily serve the data, effectively becoming only file managers = ... ;... interoperability is achieved because many = of the system-specific storage management routines are moved down into = the device ... 8 Members by name: ;(Intel Labs, co-chair) ... = (Ciprico, co-chair) ... (Sun) ... (StorageTek) ... (Seagate) ... (MTI) = ... (HP Labs) ... (StorageTek).; ;In the near term ... 
T10 Standardization of SCSI extensions to support = OSD commands. 
IETF iSCSI Requirements for OSD commands. 
Aggregation and virtualization of OSD devices. = 
Application of OSD in file systems and databases. = ;Recent Accomplishments  ... 
January 2002 - - SNIA Symposium Organizing Meeting = (join us!) 
November 2001 - - Work Group Kickstart 
February 2000 - - established SNIA and T10 = collaboration 
October 1999 - - Work Group Kickoff Pat LaVarre >>> ;Carrier, John; = <John_Carrier at adaptec.com> 02/20/02 02:53PM >>> 
There is an OSD implementation effort underway at = SNIA.  The co-chairs of 
the workgroup are Michael Mesnier = [michael.mesnier at intel.com] and Tom Ruwart 
[tmruwart at ciprico.com]. Though they sometimes = cross-post to the T10 site, 
the workgroup maintains a separate mailing list at = SNIA. --jc > -----Original Message----- 
> From: Pat LaVarre [mailto:LAVARRE at iomega.com] = 
> Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2002 9:07 = AM 
> To: 
> Subject: OSD in review - February, 2002 
> 
> 
> * From the T10 Reflector (t10 at t10.org), posted = by: 
> * ;Pat LaVarre; = <LAVARRE at iomega.com> 
> * 
> > ;Elliott, Robert; = <Robert.Elliott at COMPAQ.com> 02/19/02 12:51PM 
> > ... 
> > You may want to peruse the OSD command = set, 
> > which has lots of long CDBs 
> > and discusses using bidirectional for its = CREATE command. 
> 
> Thanks for this pointer. 
> 
> How live/dead is this OSD effort?  Is it = here that people 
> discuss it?  Anybody out there actually = implementing this protocol? 
> 
> I ask because I hear above the 2GiB limit of = FAT-16 LFN 
> people don't have a commonly agreed standard = for 
> sneaker-netting filesystems between = platforms. 
> 
> At first glance, I'd say T10 OSD is a form of = Ftp over Scsi 
> ... which is interesting for efforts like file = exchange for 
> peer-to-peer Usb (aka Usb OTG =3D On The = Go). 
> 
> Pat LaVarre 
... 
* 
* For T10 Reflector information, send a message = with 
* 'info t10' (no quotes) in the message body to = majordomo at t10.org 
------_=_NextPart_001_01C1BE1F.86B0EC90--




More information about the T10 mailing list