From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jason Gunthorpe Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 for-next 00/12] Add network namespace support in the RDMA-CM Date: Wed, 3 Jun 2015 15:45:08 -0600 Message-ID: <20150603214508.GA14968@obsidianresearch.com> References: <55674077.5040707@mellanox.com> <20150528174337.GA10448@obsidianresearch.com> <1432837360.114391.35.camel@redhat.com> <1432850150.114391.56.camel@redhat.com> <556ED0D5.8010502@mellanox.com> <20150603161447.GC12073@obsidianresearch.com> <20150603195325.GC7902@obsidianresearch.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-rdma-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: Or Gerlitz Cc: Doug Ledford , Haggai Eran , Or Gerlitz , "linux-rdma-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org" , Linux Netdev List , Liran Liss , Guy Shapiro , Shachar Raindel , Yotam Kenneth List-Id: linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Jun 03, 2015 at 11:07:37PM +0300, Or Gerlitz wrote: > As Haggai wrote, if we let the using IP address thing to fly up, we have > support for RDMA in containers using the RDMA-CM at IPoIB environments. > This will let people test, use, experiment, fix, interact (and even > production-it when static IP address assignment scheme is used). Sure, I think we all understand the goal, and you've explained some reasonable use cases for the child support. > Later, usage of alias GUIDs for IPoIB RTNL childs would allow to > remove the IP thing. How do we remove it? Along with same-guid child support? What is your idea here? > > Also, now that this has been brought up, I think you need to make a > > patch to fix the IPv6 SLAAC breakage this caused. It looks trivial to > > modify addrconf_ifid_infiniband to return error if the IPoIB child is > > sharing a guid. It was not good at all to push the child patches > > forward to 3.6/3.7 if you knew that IPv6 SLAAC was broken by them. > > Till the alias GUID thing is introduced, maybe we can patch > addrconf_ifid_infiniband to use the QPN value from the device HW > address to come up with unique IPv6 link local address, agree? where > you think we can place the 24 bits QPN? I don't know if that is a good idea, an unstable SLAAC is not in spirit with the RFCs. The safest bet is to return error and disable SLAAC completely. But I'm just guessing here - I'm only feel strongly that something should be done to address this issue in the existing kernel. Jason -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-rdma" in the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html