<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:st1="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40">
<head>
<meta http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=us-ascii">
<meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 11 (filtered medium)">
<!--[if !mso]>
<style>
v\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
o\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
w\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
.shape {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
</style>
<![endif]-->
<title>Re: [Openib-promoters] Microsoft chooses not to be on Agenda at Dev.
Summit</title>
<o:SmartTagType namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags"
name="City"/>
<o:SmartTagType namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags"
name="place"/>
<!--[if !mso]>
<style>
st1\:*{behavior:url(#default#ieooui) }
</style>
<![endif]-->
<style>
<!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:Tahoma;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
p
{mso-margin-top-alt:auto;
margin-right:0in;
mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;
margin-left:0in;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";}
span.EmailStyle18
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:Arial;
color:navy;}
@page Section1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.25in 1.0in 1.25in;}
div.Section1
{page:Section1;}
-->
</style>
</head>
<body lang=EN-US link=blue vlink=blue>
<div class=Section1>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'>Sujal, sorry, but I disagree. But maybe I
just didn’t explain myself. To my knowledge WHQL testing has been
discussed many times, but because of the complexity of the stack, it’s
never been agreed to. I believe additional work on the testing process was
needed.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'>I also disagree with your statement about
MSFT and iWARP. When the issue of iWARP came up initially I called Jim
Pinkerton personally to get his views. He said he had no choice but to come to
OpenIB as an authoritative source of a single stack for IBA. However, for
iWARP, Jim said they intended to provide support natively in their OS, so there
was nothing for us to do for iWARP support in conjunction with the Windows
stack for IBA.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'>AFAIK, the only work before is to get the
IBA stack WHQL certified – I don’t know that there’s any
iWARP work to be done. I’m happy to be proven wrong, but that’s
what I understand<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'>Jim<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<div>
<div class=MsoNormal align=center style='text-align:center'><font size=3
face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt'>
<hr size=2 width="100%" align=center tabindex=-1>
</span></font></div>
<p class=MsoNormal><b><font size=2 face=Tahoma><span style='font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Tahoma;font-weight:bold'>From:</span></font></b><font size=2
face=Tahoma><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Tahoma'> Sujal Das
[mailto:Sujal@Mellanox.com] <br>
<b><span style='font-weight:bold'>Sent:</span></b> Thursday, November 09, 2006
10:57 AM<br>
<b><span style='font-weight:bold'>To:</span></b> asafs@voltaire.com; Ryan, Jim;
bboas@systemfabricworks.com; johann.george@qlogic.com; dford@netapp.com;
jriotto@cisco.com; Thad Omura<br>
<b><span style='font-weight:bold'>Cc:</span></b> openfabrics-ewg@openib.org;
openib-promoters@openib.org<br>
<b><span style='font-weight:bold'>Subject:</span></b> Re: [Openib-promoters]
Microsoft chooses not to be on Agenda at Dev. Summit</span></font><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p style='margin-bottom:12.0pt'><font size=2 face="Times New Roman"><span
style='font-size:10.0pt'>I second Asaf on this. <br>
<br>
There has been significant work done on the Windows IB stack. But just by
a handful of vendors. <br>
<br>
The statement about Microsoft not doing WHQL on the OFA Windows stack is
incorrect. The statement about Microsoft supporting iWARP only is
incorrect - their Longhorn strategy is transport agnostic. SAN providers
for Longhorn can still come from OFA - no one is precluding it. Someone
needs to do the real work.<br>
<br>
The OFA Windows stack as it exists today in Beta form has been used by Microsoft
in some of their CCS deployments and is being actively tested within MS.
There is no lack of support from Microsoft. There is however, lack of
windows developer participation in OFA, relative to Linux. That is the crux of
the problem.<br>
<br>
We can discuss how to fix that.<br>
<br>
Sujal<br>
<br>
<br>
----- Original Message -----<br>
From: openib-promoters-bounces@openib.org
<openib-promoters-bounces@openib.org><br>
To: jim.ryan@intel.com <jim.ryan@intel.com>; bboas@systemfabricworks.com
<bboas@systemfabricworks.com>; johann.george@qlogic.com
<johann.george@qlogic.com>; dford@netapp.com <dford@netapp.com>;
jriotto@cisco.com <jriotto@cisco.com>; Thad Omura<br>
Cc: openfabrics-ewg@openib.org <openfabrics-ewg@openib.org>;
openib-promoters@openib.org <openib-promoters@openib.org><br>
Sent: Thu Nov 09 09:55:30 2006<br>
Subject: Re: [Openib-promoters] Microsoft chooses not to be on Agenda at Dev.
Summit<br>
<br>
<br>
Guys,<br>
<br>
As I stated earlier today, not having MS lead the panel or attend at all has
nothing to do with having a session on the OFA windows project. Voltaire
and Mellanox have been working on this project and invested more resources than
SS. Voltaire is shipping products based on this project and our OEMs
resell it. As part of the OFA community Voltaire decided to discontinue
its proprietary stack when this project started. We should treat it as a viable
project.<br>
<br>
If needed Voltaire will glad to lead this discussion next week it would be even
more appropriate to do it jointly with MLNX.<br>
<br>
Asaf<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
--------------------------<br>
Asaf Somekh<br>
Voltaire - The Grid Backbone<br>
<br>
<br>
-----Original Message-----<br>
From: Ryan, Jim <jim.ryan@intel.com><br>
To: Bill Boas <bboas@systemfabricworks.com>; Asaf Somekh; Johann George
<johann.george@qlogic.com>; David Ford <dford@netapp.com>; Jamie
Riotto <jriotto@cisco.com>; Thad Omura <Thad@Mellanox.com><br>
CC: Open Fabrics <openfabrics-ewg@openib.org>;
openib-promoters@openib.org <openib-promoters@openib.org><br>
Sent: Thu Nov 09 18:56:38 2006<br>
Subject: RE: Microsoft chooses not to be on Agenda at Dev. Summit<br>
<br>
Bill, thanks for raising the question. I'm a little confused by what's<br>
happening from the earlier initiative shown by SilverStorm in developing<br>
and then "controlling" the Windows stack, through some of their<br>
initiatives around version control and so on. It's not clear that's<br>
continuing on, or that it's been handed off to someone<br>
<br>
I'm afraid working with MSFT will be frustrating. They don't seem to<br>
want to work with us on WHQL certification, and as you know they have<br>
their plan for iWARP support, so we'll never have something in the<br>
Windows arena that will works as seamlessly as what we envision for<br>
Linux.<br>
<br>
My recommendation is to continue the work we've started recently with<br>
SDP and make it clear we'd like to engage more broadly, because we do.<br>
An IBA solution that leaves out Windows isn't nearly as appealing as one<br>
that includes it<br>
<br>
I'm certainly open to other ideas<br>
<br>
Thanks, jim<br>
<br>
-----Original Message-----<br>
From: Bill Boas [<a href="mailto:bboas@systemfabricworks.com">mailto:bboas@systemfabricworks.com</a>]<br>
Sent: Thursday, November 09, 2006 8:43 AM<br>
To: 'Asaf Somekh'; Ryan, Jim; 'Johann George'; 'David Ford'; Jamie<br>
Riotto; 'Thad Omura'<br>
Cc: 'Open Fabrics'; openib-promoters@openib.org<br>
Subject: Microsoft chooses not to be on Agenda at Dev. Summit<br>
<br>
Microsoft has withdrawn their "talk" on the basis it's a primarily
Linux<br>
agenda and attendees will not be that interested. They are saying they<br>
will<br>
have an observer present.<br>
<br>
OF Windows seems to be somewhat in a hiatus? As an <st1:City w:st="on"><st1:place
w:st="on">Alliance</st1:place></st1:City> we should<br>
figure<br>
out what we want to do about it?<br>
<br>
One approach might be to form a small group to work out an approach to<br>
Microsoft to try to form a tighter collaboration between the <st1:City w:st="on"><st1:place
w:st="on">Alliance</st1:place></st1:City>,<br>
per<br>
se, and Microsoft as an alternative to each of the IB h/w vendors<br>
working<br>
separately with them, as it appears is now the way it is going??<br>
<br>
Microsoft has repeated their strong interest in working with the<br>
<st1:City w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">Alliance</st1:place></st1:City><br>
but there so far the evidence of that work is where????<br>
<br>
Thoughts, please!<br>
<br>
Bill Boas<br>
VP, Business Development | System Fabric Works<br>
bboas@systemfabricworks.com | 510-375-8840<br>
<br>
<br>
-----Original Message-----<br>
From: Asaf Somekh [<a href="mailto:asafs@voltaire.com">mailto:asafs@voltaire.com</a>]<br>
Sent: Thursday, November 09, 2006 2:13 AM<br>
To: Jeff Squyres; Bill Boas<br>
Cc: Open Fabrics<br>
Subject: RE: [openfabrics-ewg] Results of agenda teleconf<br>
<br>
<br>
Jeff,<br>
<br>
Inserted Or and Yaron instead of Voltaire TBDs.<br>
<br>
As for the Windows session - I believe we should have it even if<br>
Microsoft doesn't show up. There are issues that we need to discuss<br>
regardless.<br>
<br>
Asaf<br>
<br>
-----Original Message-----<br>
From: openfabrics-ewg-bounces@openib.org<br>
[<a href="mailto:openfabrics-ewg-bounces@openib.org">mailto:openfabrics-ewg-bounces@openib.org</a>]
On Behalf Of Jeff Squyres<br>
Sent: Tuesday, November 07, 2006 8:58 PM<br>
To: Bill Boas<br>
Cc: 'Open Fabrics'<br>
Subject: Re: [openfabrics-ewg] Results of agenda teleconf<br>
<br>
On Nov 7, 2006, at 11:45 AM, Bill Boas wrote:<br>
<br>
> Because I requested it for the many people interested in the agenda <br>
> that do not wish to find or use the Developers wiki.<br>
<br>
I've addressed these points in prior e-mails, so clearly the <br>
information is not being received somehow. None of us have any more <br>
time before SC to continue this debate. I'll happy continue to <br>
discuss this over food and beverage while at SC.<br>
<br>
So -- see you all at SC! :-)<br>
<br>
--<br>
Jeff Squyres<br>
Server Virtualization Business Unit<br>
Cisco Systems<br>
<br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
openfabrics-ewg mailing list<br>
openfabrics-ewg@openib.org<br>
<a href="http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openfabrics-ewg">http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openfabrics-ewg</a><br>
_______________________________________________<br>
openib-promoters mailing list<br>
openib-promoters@openib.org<br>
<a href="http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-promoters">http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-promoters</a></span></font><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</body>
</html>