<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<TITLE>RE: [openfabrics-ewg] Getting EWG off to a rapid and positive start</TITLE>
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.2900.2802" name=GENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY>
<DIV><SPAN class=958280719-16032006><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff
size=2>Speaking for SilverStorm, I agree fully with Sujal's process
suggestions and process proposal below with one added
comment.</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=958280719-16032006><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff
size=2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=958280719-16032006><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2>Since
the EWG will be a distribution not a release, I think it is important
that we make sure we cover the two primary goals that were the genesis
of the EWG concept 1) Provide a single distribution to users that
has multivendor guaranteed component interoperability and 2) Provide a
distribution to users that has supportable, enterprise class
components</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=958280719-16032006><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff
size=2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=958280719-16032006><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2>I
suggest that the distribution, in addition to the "support" based
classifications Sujal suggests below also incorporate "interoperability"
based logic in the component classifications.</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=958280719-16032006><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff
size=2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=958280719-16032006><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2>One
suggested expanded definition approach to Sujal's below:</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=958280719-16032006><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff
size=2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=958280719-16032006><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff
size=2>1) Basic Component = All vendors that will be
offering the EWG distribution to the market agree to interoperability,
enterprise quality, and support for basic components (IE. Core,
IPoIB, etc.) </FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=958280719-16032006><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff
size=2>2) Add-on Component = Full multivendor interoperability and support
is not guaranteed to the user for an add-on component but the
component is guaranteed to be enterprise quality and support for
the component is provided by one or more vendors (IE. iSER, SRP, SDP,
etc)</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=958280719-16032006><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2>3)
Technology preview = No multivendor interoperability guarantee and no
vendor support at all ..... these components are at your own risk
components in the distribution
(MVAPICH?) </FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<P><FONT face=Arial color=#000000 size=2>Reini Florin</FONT> </P>
<P><FONT face=Arial color=#000000 size=2>Vice President of Marketing</FONT>
<BR><FONT face=Arial color=#000000 size=2>SilverStorm
Technologies<BR></FONT><BR><FONT face=Arial color=#000000 size=2>780 Fifth Ave,
Suite 140<BR>King of Prussia, PA 19406<BR>Tel: 610 233-4854</FONT>
<BR><FONT face=Arial color=#000000 size=2>Cel: 203-906-3570<BR>Fax: 610
233-4777<BR>E-mail: rflorin@silverstorm.com<BR><U>www.silverstorm.com</U>
</FONT></P>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr style="MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV class=OutlookMessageHeader dir=ltr align=left><FONT face=Tahoma
size=2>-----Original Message-----<BR><B>From:</B>
openfabrics-ewg-bounces@openib.org
[mailto:openfabrics-ewg-bounces@openib.org]<B>On Behalf Of </B>Sujal
Das<BR><B>Sent:</B> Thursday, March 16, 2006 1:51 PM<BR><B>To:</B>
Openfabrics-ewg@openib.org<BR><B>Subject:</B> RE: [openfabrics-ewg] Getting
EWG off to a rapid and positive sta rt<BR><BR></FONT></DIV>
<P align=left><FONT face="Courier New" size=2>Bryan</FONT><FONT face=Arial
size=2></FONT> <FONT face=Arial size=2>,</FONT></P>
<P align=left><FONT face=Arial size=2>Thanks for leading the
discussion. </FONT> <FONT face=Arial size=2>I have tried to address some
of the questions in the proposal below.</FONT></P>
<P align=left><FONT face=Arial size=2>All, </FONT></P>
<P align=left><FONT face=Arial size=2>Here is a strawman proposal for the
EWG</FONT> <FONT face=Arial size=2>Distribution</FONT> <FONT face=Arial
size=2>process</FONT><FONT face=Arial size=2>. I would like to call a
meeting of the EWG members on Monday between at 11:30 AM PST (this time works
for the folks in Israel)</FONT><FONT face=Arial size=2>. PLEASE
CONFIRM</FONT><FONT face=Arial size=2>:</FONT></P>
<P align=left><B><FONT face=Arial size=2>KEY PEOPLE in the
process:</FONT></B></P>
<P align=left><FONT face=Arial size=2>1.</FONT><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT>
<FONT face=Arial size=2>The EWG needs a CHAIR, per Open Fabrics Bylaws who
needs to be approved by the BOD. The Chair is a liaison between the EWG
and the BOD.</FONT><FONT face=Arial size=2> Will communicate the
existence and purpose of the EWG to OpenFabrics-General.</FONT></P>
<P align=left><FONT face=Arial size=2>2.</FONT><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT>
<FONT face=Arial size=2>RELEASE COORDINATOR who drives the upcoming
release. </FONT> <FONT face=Arial size=2>Drives</FONT><FONT face=Arial
size=2> decisions</FONT> <FONT face=Arial size=2>collaboratively
to</FONT><FONT face=Arial size=2> enable stable</FONT><FONT face=Arial
size=2>, supportable</FONT><FONT face=Arial size=2> release</FONT> <FONT
face=Arial size=2>of EWG Distribution</FONT> <FONT face=Arial size=2>on
schedule.</FONT><FONT face=Arial size=2> Defines</FONT><FONT face=Arial
size=2>:</FONT> <FONT face=Arial size=2>Which software components are
included?</FONT><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> <FONT face=Arial size=2>Which
hardware components are intended to work?</FONT></P>
<P align=left><FONT face=Arial size=2>3. Open Fabrics Release Committee Lead -
the OFR LEAD (what Bryan from P</FONT><FONT face=Arial
size=2>athScale</FONT><FONT face=Arial size=2> is today)</FONT></P>
<P align=left><FONT face=Arial size=2>4. TEST LEADS from each
Company</FONT><FONT face=Arial size=2>. Decides:</FONT> <FONT face=Arial
size=2>Which distros are targeted?</FONT><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> <FONT
face=Arial size=2>What is the test matrix?</FONT><FONT face=Arial
size=2></FONT> <FONT face=Arial size=2>What documentation will be written up
for customers?</FONT></P>
<P align=left><FONT face=Arial size=2>5. MAINTAINERS and backups
(B-MAINTAINER) for each component in EWG</FONT><FONT face=Arial size=2>: Calls
dedicated technical meetings to ensure delivery, code</FONT><FONT face=Arial
size=2>/feature</FONT><FONT face=Arial size=2> completeness.</FONT></P>
<P align=left><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </P>
<P align=left><B><FONT face=Arial size=2>Suggested
schedules:</FONT></B><B></B><B></B></P>
<P align=left><FONT face=Arial size=2>EWG Distribution 1.0 - sync with OFR
Release 1.0 date of May 8.</FONT></P>
<P align=left><FONT face=Arial size=2>EWG Distribution 1.1 - Sept (4 months
delta</FONT><FONT face=Arial size=2> between releases</FONT><FONT face=Arial
size=2>)</FONT></P>
<P align=left><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </P>
<P align=left><B><FONT face=Arial size=2>Proposal</FONT></B><B></B><B><FONT
face=Arial size=2> for electing the KEY PEOPLE:</FONT></B></P>
<P align=left><FONT face=Arial size=2>1. CHAIR is elected on a rotating basis
- changing every 4 months with EWG release completions. Represented by
system companies - Cisco, Voltaire, SilverStorm. In alphabetical
order. So, starts with Cisco as the CHAIR. Storage vendors like LSI if
they meet the criteria to a EWG member can be eligible to be CHAIR as
well. First proposed rotation is after EWG Distribution 1.1 (May 8 being
too close)</FONT><FONT face=Arial size=2>. If that is a problem, it
could be Matt</FONT> <FONT face=Arial size=2>representing</FONT><FONT
face=Arial size=2> a neutral party.</FONT></P>
<P align=left><FONT face=Arial size=2>2. RELEASE COORDINATOR is elected from
either Mellanox or PathScale on a rotating basis - changing every 4 months
with EWG release completions. </FONT> <FONT face=Arial size=2>Change will
be decided when the time comes based on voting</FONT><FONT face=Arial size=2>
or</FONT><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> <FONT face=Arial size=2>recent
past</FONT> <FONT face=Arial size=2>effectiveness etc</FONT><FONT face=Arial
size=2>.</FONT><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> <FONT face=Arial
size=2>T</FONT><FONT face=Arial size=2>his person must be</FONT> <FONT
face=Arial size=2>commercially</FONT> <FONT face=Arial size=2>neutral to the
system companies who compete in the end user space. At any time Mellanox
or PathScale will be the RELEASE COORDINATOR or OFR LEAD</FONT><FONT
face=Arial size=2>, not both</FONT><FONT face=Arial size=2>. Currently
Pathscale is OFR LEAD. So Mellanox will be RELEASE COORDINATOR.
First p</FONT><FONT face=Arial size=2>ossible</FONT><FONT face=Arial size=2>
rotation</FONT><FONT face=Arial size=2> (based on voting, effectiveness
etc.)</FONT><FONT face=Arial size=2> is after EWG Distribution 1.1 (May 8
being too close)</FONT></P>
<P align=left><FONT face=Arial size=2>3. OFR LEAD is elected from either
Mellanox or PathScale on a rotating basis - changing every 4 months with EWG
release completions.</FONT> <FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> <FONT
face=Arial size=2>Change will be decided when the time comes based on
voting</FONT><FONT face=Arial size=2> or</FONT><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT>
<FONT face=Arial size=2>recent past</FONT> <FONT face=Arial
size=2>effectiveness etc</FONT><FONT face=Arial size=2>.</FONT><FONT
face=Arial size=2></FONT> <FONT face=Arial size=2>T</FONT><FONT face=Arial
size=2>his person must be</FONT> <FONT face=Arial size=2>commercially</FONT>
<FONT face=Arial size=2>neutral to the system companies who compete in the end
user space</FONT><FONT face=Arial size=2>. </FONT> <FONT face=Arial
size=2>At any time Mellanox or PathScale will be the RELEASE COORDINATOR or
OFR LEAD</FONT><FONT face=Arial size=2>, not both</FONT><FONT face=Arial
size=2>. Currently Pathscale is OFR LEAD. So Mellanox will be
RELEASE COORDINATOR. First p</FONT><FONT face=Arial
size=2>ossible</FONT><FONT face=Arial size=2> rotation</FONT><FONT face=Arial
size=2> (based on voting, effectiveness etc.)</FONT><FONT face=Arial size=2>
is after EWG Distribution 1.1 (May 8 being too close)</FONT></P>
<P align=left><FONT face=Arial size=2>4. TEST LEADS - elected by individual
companies. Scott from Cisco, Bob from SST, Moni from V, Amit from
M</FONT><FONT face=Arial size=2>ellanox</FONT><FONT face=Arial size=2>, Betsy
from P</FONT><FONT face=Arial size=2>athscale</FONT><FONT face=Arial
size=2>. </FONT> </P><BR>
<P align=left><FONT face=Arial size=2>5. MAINTAINERS (B-MAINTAINERS): Selected
based on who is currently maintaining. MAINTAINER selects B-MAINTAINER
based on technical expertise, past contributions. Here are MAINTAINERS
and suggestions for B-MAINTAINERS:</FONT></P>
<P align=left><FONT face=Arial size=2>o</FONT><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT>
<FONT face=Arial size=2>MTHCA - Roland (Michael Tsirkin)</FONT></P>
<P align=left><FONT face=Arial size=2>o</FONT> <FONT face=Arial
size=2>IPATH</FONT><FONT face=Arial size=2> - Roland (</FONT><FONT
face="Courier New" size=2>Bryan</FONT><FONT face=Arial size=2>)</FONT></P>
<P align=left><FONT face=Arial size=2>o Core - Roland (</FONT><FONT
face="Courier New" size=2>Bryan</FONT><FONT face=Arial size=2>) </FONT></P>
<P align=left><FONT face=Arial size=2>o IPoIB - Roland (Eli Cohen)</FONT></P>
<P align=left><FONT face=Arial size=2>o SDP - Michael Tsirkin (?)</FONT></P>
<P align=left><FONT face=Arial size=2>o SRP - Roland (Vu)</FONT></P>
<P align=left><FONT face=Arial size=2>o iSER - Moni (?)</FONT></P>
<P align=left><FONT face=Arial size=2>o RDS - Todd (</FONT><FONT face=Arial
size=2>?</FONT><FONT face=Arial size=2>)</FONT></P>
<P align=left><FONT face=Arial size=2>o MVAPICH -</FONT><FONT face=Arial
size=2> ?? (ideally would like companies with vested interest to productize
MVAPICH)</FONT></P>
<P align=left><FONT face=Arial size=2>o Open MPI -</FONT> <FONT face=Arial
size=2>?? (ideally would like companies with vested interest to
productize</FONT> <FONT face=Arial size=2>Open MPI</FONT><FONT face=Arial
size=2>)</FONT></P>
<P align=left><FONT face=Arial size=2>o OSM -</FONT> <FONT face=Arial
size=2>Eitan (Hal)</FONT><FONT face=Arial size=2> </FONT> <FONT
face=Arial size=2>(ideally would like companies with vested interest to
productize</FONT> <FONT face=Arial size=2>OSM</FONT><FONT face=Arial
size=2>)</FONT></P>
<P align=left><FONT face=Arial size=2>o Diagnostic Tools -</FONT> <FONT
face=Arial size=2>Eitan</FONT> <FONT face=Arial size=2>(</FONT><FONT
face=Arial size=2>Hal</FONT><FONT face=Arial size=2>)</FONT></P>
<P align=left><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </P>
<P align=left><B><FONT face=Arial size=2>RELEASE</FONT></B><B></B><B><FONT
face=Arial size=2> COMPONENT</FONT></B><B></B><B><FONT face=Arial size=2>
CATEGORIES</FONT></B><B></B><B><FONT face=Arial size=2>:</FONT></B></P>
<P align=left><FONT face=Arial size=2>They fall under 3 categories:</FONT></P>
<P align=left><FONT face=Arial size=2>o BASE COMPONENTS: IPoIB, SDP,
SRP, iSER, RDS, Open MPI,</FONT> <FONT face=Arial size=2>iPath,</FONT> <FONT
face=Arial size=2>MTHCA</FONT></P>
<P align=left><FONT face=Arial size=2>o Depending on vendors
desire</FONT><FONT face=Arial size=2>/ability</FONT><FONT face=Arial size=2>
to qualify and support BASE COMPONENTS - some may be released and supported by
vendors as TECH PREVIEW only. E.g., iSER could be TECH PREVIEW for
Cisco. </FONT> <FONT face=Arial size=2>SRP could be TECH PREVIEW for
Voltaire.</FONT><FONT face=Arial size=2> RDS could be TECH PREVIEW for
all etc. The goal is to get TECH PREVIEW components graduate to
supported BASE COMPONENTS in the EWG</FONT> <FONT face=Arial
size=2>Distribution</FONT> <FONT face=Arial size=2>1.1</FONT><FONT face=Arial
size=2> scheduled for September.</FONT></P>
<P align=left><FONT face=Arial size=2>o ADD-ON -</FONT> <FONT face=Arial
size=2>These will be added in</FONT> <FONT face=Arial size=2>Vendor
specific</FONT> <FONT face=Arial size=2>distributions as</FONT> <FONT
face=Arial size=2>add-ons</FONT> <FONT face=Arial size=2>on top of (and not
replacing</FONT><FONT face=Arial size=2>)</FONT><FONT face=Arial size=2> BASE
COMPONENTS.</FONT><FONT face=Arial size=2> OSM, Proprietary SM, Proprietary
MPI</FONT><FONT face=Arial size=2>, other value added management and
tools</FONT><FONT face=Arial size=2> etc</FONT><FONT face=Arial size=2> fall
in this category</FONT></P>
<P align=left><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </P>
<P align=left><B><FONT face=Arial size=2>EWG DISTRIBUTION
MANAGEMENT</FONT></B><B></B><B><FONT face=Arial size=2> + SYNCH
WIT</FONT></B><B></B><B><FONT face=Arial size=2>H</FONT></B><B></B><B><FONT
face=Arial size=2> OFR RC BRANCH</FONT></B><B></B><B></B></P>
<P align=left><FONT face=Arial size=2>Copy</FONT><FONT face=Arial size=2> a
specific trunk</FONT><FONT face=Arial size=2>/branch</FONT><FONT face=Arial
size=2> version to</FONT> <FONT face=Arial size=2>EWG</FONT><FONT face=Arial
size=2> area you can call this a tag. The main idea of a tag is that you do
not commit changes to the tagged area.</FONT></P>
<P align=left><FONT face=Arial size=2>In addition</FONT> <FONT face=Arial
size=2>there is a</FONT><FONT face=Arial size=2> directory called patches
where</FONT> <FONT face=Arial size=2>EWG places</FONT><FONT face=Arial size=2>
the fixes wanted that were not in the trunk</FONT><FONT face=Arial
size=2>/branch</FONT><FONT face=Arial size=2>.</FONT><FONT face=Arial
size=2> The</FONT> <FONT face=Arial size=2>OFR LEAD</FONT><FONT
face=Arial size=2> folds those into the OFR-RC</FONT> <FONT face=Arial
size=2>branch</FONT><FONT face=Arial size=2> immediately.</FONT> <FONT
face=Arial size=2> Coordinated with RELEASE COORDINATOR as
necessary.</FONT></P>
<P align=left><FONT face=Arial size=2>Continue</FONT><FONT face=Arial size=2>
copy of trunk</FONT><FONT face=Arial size=2>/branch</FONT><FONT face=Arial
size=2> to the tag few times till</FONT> <FONT face=Arial size=2>EWG
gets</FONT><FONT face=Arial size=2> to the point</FONT> <FONT face=Arial
size=2>it wants to freeze code</FONT><FONT face=Arial size=2>. >From this
point</FONT><FONT face=Arial size=2> (regression test phase)</FONT><FONT
face=Arial size=2></FONT> <FONT face=Arial size=2>EWG</FONT><FONT face=Arial
size=2> only add</FONT><FONT face=Arial size=2>s</FONT><FONT face=Arial
size=2> patches (some</FONT> <FONT face=Arial size=2>can be EWG</FONT><FONT
face=Arial size=2> fixes and some from the trunk</FONT><FONT face=Arial
size=2>/branch</FONT><FONT face=Arial size=2>).</FONT></P>
<P align=left><FONT face=Arial size=2>We need a discussion on the contents
of</FONT> <FONT face=Arial size=2>the</FONT> <FONT face=Arial size=2>OFR
rc1</FONT> <FONT face=Arial size=2>branch</FONT> <FONT face=Arial size=2>-
whether it meets the need of end users defined by the EWG and if that needs to
be updated (as rc2) based on feedback from EWG</FONT><FONT face=Arial
size=2>.</FONT></P><BR>
<P align=left><FONT face="Courier New" size=2>Thanks</FONT></P>
<P align=left><FONT face="Courier New" size=2>Sujal</FONT></P>
<P align=left><FONT face="Courier New" size=2>-----Original
Message-----<BR>From: Bryan O'Sullivan [<A
href="mailto:bos@pathscale.com">mailto:bos@pathscale.com</A>]<BR>Sent:
Thursday, March 16, 2006 9:36 AM<BR>To: Openfabrics-ewg@openib.org<BR>Subject:
[openfabrics-ewg] Getting EWG off to a rapid and positive start</FONT></P>
<P align=left><FONT face="Courier New" size=2>Hello -</FONT></P>
<P align=left><FONT face="Courier New" size=2>I'll be PathScale's engineering
and testing representative on the EWG.</FONT></P>
<P align=left><FONT face="Courier New" size=2>I would suggest that we start by
clarifying the goals of the EWG</FONT></P>
<P align=left><FONT face="Courier New" size=2>process, so that everyone is in
sync.</FONT></P>
<P align=left><FONT face="Courier New" size=2>My principal interest is in
ensuring that there is no duplicated or</FONT></P>
<P align=left><FONT face="Courier New" size=2>wasted effort between the 1.0
process and the EWG process, and that each</FONT></P>
<P align=left><FONT face="Courier New" size=2>can proceed at its own
appropriate pace with maximal cooperation between</FONT></P>
<P align=left><FONT face="Courier New" size=2>the two.</FONT></P>
<P align=left><FONT face="Courier New" size=2>What I believe is a good way to
achieve this is as follows.</FONT></P>
<P align=left><FONT face="Courier New" size=2>Somebody needs to articulate the
goals of the EWG process, and the</FONT></P>
<P align=left><FONT face="Courier New" size=2>timeline in which it will take
place. Here are some suggestions I have.</FONT></P>
<P align=left><FONT face="Courier New" size=2> *
The existence of EWG should be made public on openib-general,</FONT></P>
<P align=left><FONT face="Courier New"
size=2> and it must be made clear
that there is cooperation, not</FONT></P>
<P align=left><FONT face="Courier New"
size=2> duplication, between the 1.0
and EWG processes.</FONT></P>
<P align=left><FONT face="Courier New" size=2> *
Which software components are included?</FONT></P>
<P align=left><FONT face="Courier New" size=2> *
Which hardware components are intended to work?</FONT></P>
<P align=left><FONT face="Courier New" size=2> *
Which distros are targeted?</FONT></P>
<P align=left><FONT face="Courier New" size=2> *
What is the test matrix?</FONT></P>
<P align=left><FONT face="Courier New" size=2> *
What documentation will be written up for customers?</FONT></P>
<P align=left><FONT face="Courier New" size=2> *
How long is the support window?</FONT></P>
<P align=left><FONT face="Courier New" size=2> *
What's the policy with respect to switching to the official 1.0</FONT></P>
<P align=left><FONT face="Courier New"
size=2> and subsequent
releases?</FONT></P>
<P align=left><FONT face="Courier New" size=2>To get the testing and defect
fixing balls rolling as quickly as</FONT></P>
<P align=left><FONT face="Courier New" size=2>possible, EWG contributors ought
to use the 1.0 release candidate tree</FONT></P>
<P align=left><FONT face="Courier New" size=2>at <A
href="https://openib.org/svn/gen2/branches/1.0/"
target=_blank>https://openib.org/svn/gen2/branches/1.0/</A> as its initial
basis for</FONT></P>
<P align=left><FONT face="Courier New" size=2>source code to build and
test. You can download source tarballs and</FONT></P>
<P align=left><FONT face="Courier New" size=2>some RPM packages from <A
href="http://openib.red-bean.com/"
target=_blank>http://openib.red-bean.com/</A></FONT></P>
<P align=left><FONT face="Courier New" size=2>It's fine with me if EWG
branches from 1.0 so that it can proceed at its</FONT></P>
<P align=left><FONT face="Courier New" size=2>own pace. However, if this
happens, there must be frequent merges</FONT></P>
<P align=left><FONT face="Courier New" size=2>between the two trees, because
clearly everything that happens in one</FONT></P>
<P align=left><FONT face="Courier New" size=2>branch ought to be beneficial to
the other.</FONT></P>
<P align=left><FONT face="Courier New" size=2>The mechanism that EWG uses to
track defects should be OpenIB Bugzilla.</FONT></P>
<P align=left><FONT face="Courier New" size=2>I believe it's already
configured in an appropriate manner. If not, I</FONT></P>
<P align=left><FONT face="Courier New" size=2>will be happy to make any needed
changes, or ask our colleagues at</FONT></P>
<P align=left><FONT face="Courier New" size=2>Sandia to help out.</FONT></P>
<P align=left> <FONT
face="Courier New" size=2><b</FONT></P>
<P align=left><FONT face="Courier New"
size=2>_______________________________________________</FONT></P>
<P align=left><FONT face="Courier New" size=2>openfabrics-ewg mailing
list</FONT></P>
<P align=left><FONT face="Courier New"
size=2>openfabrics-ewg@openib.org</FONT></P>
<P align=left><FONT face="Courier New" size=2><A
href="http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openfabrics-ewg"
target=_blank>http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openfabrics-ewg</A></FONT></P></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>