[Todd Corzett]

I built up a 4 drive external firewire case the other day. I'm using two seperate firewire bridgeboards (two drives to each board). I was wanting to use this case for both my computers (B&W450 and Ti800). It would be really nice to have a large storage system (4x120GB), but it becomes useless if it's on the B&W (webserver) without fast access to my Ti800... and vice versa... it's useless to have the storage, but not to be able to access it for my server. I'm looking for the best way to give my server mass storage at the same time giving my Ti800 quick access speeds to the information...

My question is: Can I hook the case into both computers at the same time?

I can hook from one computer into one bridgeboard and use two drives on that computer... Hook the other computer into the other bridgeboard and use the other two drives... but what will happen if I put a cable between the two bridgeboards?

I'm probably going to just try it and see what happens --- unless I could physically damage anythign!?! Thank you for any information.

-Todd...

[Carl Norum]

You can absolutely do that. It is one of the great things about firewire.

[shunt]

Originally posted by Todd Corzett:

I can hook from one computer into one bridgeboard and use two drives on that computer... Hook the other computer into the other bridgeboard and use the other two drives... but what will happen if I put a cable between the two bridgeboards?

I'm probably going to just try it and see what happens --- unless I could physically damage anythign!?! Thank you for any information.

-Todd...

Isn't that type of wiring just a diasy-chain??

Did you try this? Let us know if it worked.

BTW-Could you provide a source/price for the bridges you used? I'm on a similar quest , but still in planning stages, thanks...

[Todd Corzett]

I've not tried the linking between the two computers yet (just got home from a long weekend). It's not a simple daisy chain... that only involves one computer and many devices. I want to hook in many devices into two computers at once.

As for the bridgeboards I got them from FWDepot.com. They were quite pricy, almost 90% of a normal enclosure you would buy ($80 for each bridgeboard, where a whole case would be $110 or less)... I'm using the bridgeboards found here (http://www.fwdepot.com/catalog/produ...products_id=32). I have it in a simple 4 bay 5.25" case with a 250W power supply. I have two of the IDE drives hooked into one of the bridgeboards, and the other two into the second bridgeboard. I then use a 6" patch cable to connect the two brigeboards. Grand total for the bridgeboards, 6" patch, and 3 meter cable + S&H was about $220. You can buy a pre-built case exactly like mine, but it'll cost you $499 on eBay (someone else is selling one, well the last time I checked). If you only need two drives you can do a search... there is a guy selling 2x120GB firewire cases (only one bridgboard) for under $325... but at the current price of 120GB drives ($140) that's a bit expensive, if you know how to build a box yourself.

The case is working great right now. I have a 75GB 7200RPM drive, Zip 250, and DVD drive in the case right now (just leftover things from my PC that has died). I will eventually put four 120GB 7200RPM drives (maybe 160GB if they ever get up to 7200RPM). It will be a great storage device for my PowerBook and hopefully also my server (that way I can post the +1500 high resolution automotive photographs I have taken over the past few months).

If anyone has any questions just let me know.

-Todd...

[shunt]

Awesome info....I see what you mean about the wiring.

I couldn't believe the lopsided pricing on those bridges, too. My plans at this time include a DVD burner and hardrive, but an extra couple of open bays would be nice for future drives.

Thanks for the details, and I'm definitely gonna "roll my own" too.

[CRASH HARDDRIVE]

Linking the two bridge boards will work fine of course. Forget that they are in the same case- if you had 2 seperate units, each with a bridgeboard it's obvious you can link them and chain other devices through them, one of the whole points of Firewire.

So most certainly you can hook a Firewire cable from board to board and have all 4 devices show up on one computer at the same time with no adverse affects. The reason the boards have 2 ports to begin with is to allow for this type of chaining.

As for 2 seperate computers mounting the same Firewire devices at once... ahh the unrealized dream of Firewire's promised but undelivered self-networking.

Won't work, unfortunately. The first computer to boot, or to be attached to the FW chain will have control of all the devices, the 2nd none of them. A drive attached by FW absolutly cannot be mounted on 2 comps at the same time under current OS's.

This is not due to the FW standard itself, but the current limitations of MacOS and Windows. Blame Apple for not getting on the ball with their own standard, and beating PCs to the punch with FW self-networking. Ahh, but another designer case is probably higher on Apple's current agenda than some truly useful OS-level addition that high end users would absolutely pee themselves over. 10 to 1 M$ beats Apple to it with this. (If Jaguar removes this limitation I'll gladly eat my words, but I'm not holding my breath!)

Here's one article reaching the same conclusion after trying Firewire self-networking themselves, here.

[Todd Corzett]

Crash - Thank you for the link. I'm still going to give it a try, maybe lightning will strike and it will work... I also followed the link on that page and read a little about FW networking. It saif that ME was the only OS with the capability... Does a similar thing exist in OSX? or 3rd Party App? If I could hook the drives to the server (B&W) and then link that computer to my PowerBook when needed (like I do now with my intranet - wow, buzzword! lol!) it would be great. I don't mind not having the drives directly linked to my PowerBook, but the slow speeds of even 100base (too bad I dont have 1000base for my B&W - is there a 100base PCI card available... I'll start a new thread for this one...) is slow compared to FW.

Depending on how into it you really want to be, you can buy a bunch of bridgeboards and hook 15' worth of drives up! I wouldn't want to be the one paying for it though ...

If you're only going to hook 1 drive up, a comercially available case is perfect for you. For me, I had a 4 bay case laying around - and wanted to set it up for long term mass storage use - it was more cost effective to build a box. Again, if you have any questions just ask - it's mostly straight forward, but just incase!

-Todd...

[tooki]

Originally posted by CRASH HARDDRIVE:
As for 2 seperate computers mounting the same Firewire devices at once... ahh the unrealized dream of Firewire's promised but undelivered self-networking.

Bull doodie. FireWire was never designed for networking. This was made very clear from the beginning. FireWire networking is a hack, just like USB and Bluetooth networking.

It is true that it's the OS limiting sharing of peripherals, but it's not surprising: if you put a CD in a drive and connected it to two computers, how would you have it mount on both? I suppose it would be possible to do, but it'd be murky.

tooki

[Todd Corzett]

I do not care if the drive is mounted (locally) on both computers. I just want to have access to the drives from both computers... even if one is mounted remotely. I could have the drives mounted to one computer locally and through a "net" connection mount the drives on the other computer. I would do this, but 100base is too slow (I'm trying to figure out a Gigabit solution, but that would still be slower than FW)...

Is there a difference (from the drive's perspective) being mounted locally verses being remotely mounted? I know a drive can be accesses at the same time from several different networked computers... but it seems that is dependent on the host computer...

Well it's a complicated situation when trying to maximize the speed between the two computers... Maybe a Gigabit connection would be fast enough... but that brings about even more problems (see the network forum for more information on that problem).

Thanks for all the help so far!

-Todd...

[nana4]

Originally posted by Todd Corzett:
I do not care if the drive is mounted (locally) on both computers. I just want to have access to the drives from both computers... even if one is mounted remotely. I could have the drives mounted to one computer locally and through a "net" connection mount the drives on the other computer. I would do this, but 100base is too slow (I'm trying to figure out a Gigabit solution, but that would still be slower than FW)...

A gigabit connection is far faster than a Firewire connection. 1000 megabit/sec (duplex) as opposed to the 400Mbit/sec of Firewire. All this in an ideal world of course.

[CRASH HARDDRIVE]

Originally posted by tooki:
[B]

Bull doodie. FireWire was never designed for networking. This was made very clear from the beginning.

Where to even begin? First of all, Firewire networking is an available, viable option RIGHT NOW, today. I wasn't even talking about that, I was talking about Firewire device SELF-networking, IE: the drive-sharing situation. Windows XP and ME have fully implemented full speed Firewire networking right out of the box. Sorry, It�s actually Mac OS that is the latecomer to this party with out of the box support.

As for the promise of self-networking with Firewire, if you want to go 'back to the beginning' as to what was �the promise�, try here.

Imagine networking a dozen computers, a couple scanners, several huge hard drives, and a whole bunch of digital AV equipment without installing a hub, a server, or special device sharing software.

That's the promise of FireWire.

FireWire allows multiple computers on the same chain, each with access to any device on that chain.

Why invest in an AppleShare server when FireWire lets you share a hard drive at 100-400Mbps? Instead of sending files to the server so it can write them to a central hard drive, you'll be able to write directly to the drive.

Yup sure would be nice.

FireWire networking is a hack, just like USB and Bluetooth networking.

It's no more a 'hack' sending IP data through a Firewire connection that it is through an Ethernet connection. Just faster. The capability was part of the design goal of the 1394 standard from the start, look it up. Firewire was not only designed with networking as one of the goals, one of real buzzes about it was it�s promised ability to link devices together without even the aid of a computer.

FYI, there are already a few types of scanners and high end Video cameras that self-network and can be shared by multiple computers at once via Firewire.

if you put a CD in a drive and connected it to two computers, how would you have it mount on both? I suppose it would be possible to do, but it'd be murky.

Heh. You can do this incredible feat of 'magic' for yourself right now. Connect two Macs via Ethernet. Share the CD drive. Wave your hands and gesture, while repeating the words "Alakazam, Alakazoom, Alakdoodle!" Then stare in amazement as the CD mysteriously mounts on both desktops and is accessible from either! (This oh so mysterious �hack� works with hard drives and any number of devices!)

With a little 'out of the box' thinking, you'll maybe realize that doing this over Ethernet is actually less practical and efficient than doing so over a faster FW connection would be. The drives themselves obviously have no grudge against being networked or being shared by more than one computer, which seems to be the �murkiness� you�re afraid of for whatever reason.

Anyway, all of this does raise an issue I hadn�t considered; the possibility of Todd being able to Firewire-network the device he created using a product like Firenet.

I�ve networked PCs with Firewire but not Macs, so personally I haven�t used this software. Seems to me however, you could have one Mac controlling the Firewire devices, network that Mac to the other through Firenet, and then have access to all the drives on both Macs at the full 400Mbs. I think this option costs $60 to hook up 2 Macs or $25 each for more than two.

Also, I think you can download it and try it out first- just has a limitation of 30 minutes of use.

[Todd Corzett]

FireNet looks like it will work perfictly! I was hoping to have it hooked into both computer, but it doesn't really matter if I can remotly mount it... I didn't want to use 100base beceause it's 4x slower than FW. I was thinking to use a Gigabit patch betweent the two computers, but this raises issues because the B&W needs to be on one network and the PowerBook needs to be on another network. Also, what I just realized is that the FW hookup to the first computer will be a limiting factor with gigabit... it doesn't matter how fast the connection between the two computers is if the drves are limited to a 400Mb firewire connection.

I'm going to download the trial version and get it all hooked up sometime tonight. Hopefully this will work how I need it to, if so I'll purchase a full license for FireNet.

Only issue I have now is finding a perminate place to have my server so I can get a registered domain name (need to put it on my business cards too).

-Todd...

[nana4]

Are your firewire connected hardrives running in RAID 0? Because if they are only running singly, they will barely exceed the 400mbits/sec transfer rate of the firewire connection. Also, the hard drive in your Powerbook will hardly break 25MB/sec.

[CRASH HARDDRIVE]

Just exactly how fast does a storage system need to be?

More and more I like this FireNet idea for my own use... going to try setting up my own systems on that this weekend, and if it works well, I may just replace some of my ethernet use with it. (Gotta get some 15' Firewire cables first).

Personally I just need large files transfered from machine as fast as possible, not a setup to actally work on files through the network.

[Todd Corzett]

I'm looking for a way to have my mass storage on my server computer and have it accessable on my PowerBook. I would like to not have to copy files to/from my server to use them... so around 400Mb connection is what I'm looking for (that's the max speed available from the hard drives in the FW case anyhow)...

I played around with FireNet a little last night, but couldn't share the drives (it looks like it's working, I just havn't figured everything out).

Another option is to have the cases hooked into my PowerBook and remotly mounted on my B&W... but this requires 1)A second firewire port to connet the computers, or 2)A way to connect two computers that are on totally different networks...

I might just forget the whole thing and use my friends linux server and ftp all the data whenever I want (the way I currently do it)... This way I have a backup copy incase my computer or the server dies.

-Todd...