From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Or Gerlitz Subject: Re: QoS in local SA entity Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2009 07:29:38 +0200 Message-ID: <4AF8FA42.4000905@voltaire.com> References: <4AF2C00A.4040808@voltaire.com> <9BF1CEFA7F6F44F5B5641065C4914EB5@amr.corp.intel.com> <4AF66473.2050303@voltaire.com> <5C9CD47F123648F0A926E151BF775484@amr.corp.intel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <5C9CD47F123648F0A926E151BF775484-Zpru7NauK7drdx17CPfAsdBPR1lH4CV8@public.gmane.org> Sender: linux-rdma-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: Sean Hefty Cc: linux-rdma List-Id: linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org Sean Hefty wrote: > [...] The current implementation of ACM converts this to: > ** Source sends a multicast request to destination IP > ** Destination sends a response with IP to DGID mapping > - Path record is constructed from multicast group information > ACM needs to know what the local addresses are, so it can respond to requests > for those addresses okay got it. Still, how do you see my suggestion on the unified/modified librdmacm flow (L1/L2/L3 in my email) which would be taken when working against a "DGID/Route" provider such as ACM? Or. -- 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