Re: U160 or U320 SCSI for laptop?
- From: "Folkert Rienstra" <see_reply-to@xxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2007 19:06:20 +0200
"Jeff Jonas" <jeffj@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message news:fadf76$19d$1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
I have an lto-3 tapedrive with U320 interface. I think I can connect
it to both U160 and U320. But I need to connect it to a laptop as well.
Do any options exist to interface these types of SCSI to laptops?
That's just the tip of the iceberg.
There are/were cardbus/PCMCIA SCSI host-adapters,
and there's a Xircom USB to SCSI adapter (only i-mac is supported).
But what tape format are you using
Ahh, you think he lied when he said LTO-3.
and what software are you using to achieve that?.
I suspect "older" backup programs either worked directly to the
hardware, or depended on a software layer such as Adaptec's ASPI.
All that needs to be recreated.
I cut the Gordian Knot by using Linux for the tape drive
and then file transfer the files via the network.
You best option would be a desktop with a U160 or U320 PCI SCSI con-
troller and a NIC and a NIC for the laptop (builtin or PCMCIA/CardBus).
And either a EtherNet switch or a crossover EtherNet 10/100BaseT cable.
But that means the desktop needs to provide the tape software
which probably does NOT work directly thru the network.
The files will need to be transferred separately
(that's easier if the laptop's disk can be mapped to a drive letter
AND the tape software handles network-mapped drives).
Even Unix/Linux dances around that by remote-executing the tape command
(tar, cpio) on the node with the tape drive and piping the result via the net-
work to the desired node. Only RFS gave true remote access to devices via the
network since it was stateful and tunnelled the ioctl commands via the network.
- Prev by Date: Re: U160 or U320 SCSI for laptop?
- Next by Date: Re: U160 or U320 SCSI for laptop?
- Previous by thread: Re: U160 or U320 SCSI for laptop?
- Next by thread: Re: U160 or U320 SCSI for laptop?