Why would you compare FCoE and iSCSI on a 10Gbit network interface vs. Fibre Channel running at only 4Gb?
@davidsinaus: You will notice that the bandwidth for FCoE and iSCSI were managed to 4Gb via ETS to ensure that it was an apples to apples comparison in terms of bandwidth. Sicne DCB - a requirement for FCoE - requires a DCB capable CNA and switch, which are all no "slower" than 10Gb, you have no choice ethernet bandwidth class of devices.
You compare a 10Gb iSCSI network with a 4Gb FC network, but for the price of a 10Gb iSCSI network you can buy a 8Gb FC network. The price is the only common element you can compare. Which performance you can have for the same price.
@ManuFr Have you ever bought a FC switch? If you look at Brocade based switches, it´s not only the FC switch itselft you have to buy, add the fc modules, add licenses, add software and hardware support contract for the hardware. You can get 10Gbe ethernet switches for a much lower price nowadays...
Now that 2 years have passed, do you still agree with this compelling attempt to revive iSCSI?
iSCSI on Jumbo frames must ensure that every device from Initiator to Target has Jumbo frames enabled as well as identify if the Target can handle the 9k payload.
After reading the initial 2 paragraphs I cannot tell if the iSCSI comparison with FC/FCOE is based off of the Jumbo frame or 1500 MTU frame. I am guessing Jumbo, is that correct?
What is the chance of comparing FCoE on Jumbo Frames to iSCSI?
No matter how you dice it, FC is the most reliable method.