<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN">
<HTML>
<HEAD>
<META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; charset=utf-8">
<META NAME="Generator" CONTENT="MS Exchange Server version 6.5.7226.0">
<TITLE>Re: [Openib-promoters] Microsoft chooses not to be on Agenda at Dev. Summit</TITLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY>
<!-- Converted from text/plain format -->
<P><FONT SIZE=2>Jim,<BR>
We can discuss these details at the workshop. There is active work going on at MS and in Mellanox to complete the WHQL cert. There is no stack complexity issue. IPoIB and WSD are what will be WHQLed. There are no definitive plans for other ULPs but MS are willing to listen and collaborate - based on recent discussions.<BR>
<BR>
On iWarp support, your statement seems to imply that iWARP will be completely supported in the native OS. And there is no way to support IBA in that framework. We beg to differ - we have had very recent discussions with MS on this. Not with Jim Pinkerton, but with his successors in the core networking team.<BR>
<BR>
Sujal<BR>
<BR>
Sujal<BR>
<BR>
----- Original Message -----<BR>
From: Ryan, Jim <jim.ryan@intel.com><BR>
To: Sujal Das; asafs@voltaire.com <asafs@voltaire.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 12:28:05 2006<BR>
Subject: RE: [Openib-promoters] Microsoft chooses not to be on Agenda at Dev. Summit<BR>
<BR>
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.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
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.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
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<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Jim<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
________________________________<BR>
<BR>
From: Sujal Das [<A HREF="mailto:Sujal@Mellanox.com">mailto:Sujal@Mellanox.com</A>]<BR>
Sent: Thursday, November 09, 2006 10:57 AM<BR>
To: asafs@voltaire.com; Ryan, Jim; bboas@systemfabricworks.com; johann.george@qlogic.com; dford@netapp.com; jriotto@cisco.com; Thad Omura<BR>
Cc: openfabrics-ewg@openib.org; openib-promoters@openib.org<BR>
Subject: Re: [Openib-promoters] Microsoft chooses not to be on Agenda at Dev. Summit<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
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 Alliance 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 Alliance,<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>
Alliance<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><BR>
<BR>
</FONT>
</P>
</BODY>
</HTML>