 and even secure on an end-to-end basis. In the following section, we will turn our attention to this second major storage network technology-IP storage. We do not advocate either one of these two technologies. This is a business decision every organ- ization that envisions storage networks must make. It depends on how the potential deployment of each one of these two technologies maps onto the enterprise case or onto the users' organization case, business model and operational processes, budget and timing constraints, technical skills, manpower, expertise, the current computing and network infrastructure, the estimated position on the learning curve, and the disaster recovery and survivability constraints of the organization. We discuss these 1. The question marks shown on some parameters of this table are deliberately introduced as food for thought in order to ques- tion some of the arguments the FCIA has raised against the potential reliability and scalability of GbE networks carrying TCP/IP. GbE scales nicely to 10 GbE. If TCP/IP runs over it, the reliability of the sequenced delivery issue is well addressed. Of course, if TCP is not used over IP in order to improve performance, something like the User Datagram Protocol (UDP) would have to used, which would validate the FCIA's reliability concern. However, when TCP is the transport protocol of choice, some storage applications may run out of steam when executed on hardware of limited computational horsepower. Retransmission latencies associated with TCP operations may also end up being prohibitively long in some cases, whereas the number of simultaneous TCP sessions with satisfactory performance may be constrained for a given hardware configuration. This situation, as expected, improve decidedly if it takes place in a 10 GbE environment instead, but then the cost and complexity of the 10 Gbps adapter hard- ware to connect storage devices to such a network become significantly higher. In other words, the proverbial jury is still out; how- ever, the IP storage 