[openib-general] [ANNOUNCE] Contribute RDS (ReliableDatagramSockets) to OpenIB

[Michael Krause]

At 02:09 PM 11/9/2005, Greg Lindahl wrote:
>On Wed, Nov 09, 2005 at 01:57:06PM -0800, Michael Krause wrote:
>
> > What you indicate above is that RDS
> > will implement a resync of the two sides of the association to determine
> > what has been successfully sent.
>
>More accurate to say that it "could" implement that. I'm just
>kibbutzing on someone else's proposal.
>
> > This then implies that the reliability of the underlying
> > interconnect isn't as critical per se as the end-to-end RDS protocol
> > will assure that data is delivered to the RDS components in the face
> > of hardware failures.  Correct?
>
>Yes. That's the intent that I see in the proposal. The implementation
>required to actually support this may not be what the proposers had in
>mind.

If it is to be reasonably robust, then RDS should be required to support 
the resync between the two sides of the communication.  This aligns with 
the stated objective of implementing reliability in one location in 
software and one location in hardware.  Without such resync being required 
in the ULP, then one ends up with a ULP that falls shorts of its stated 
objectives and pushes complexity back up to the application which is where 
the advocates have stated it is too complex or expensive to get it correct.


>This sort of message service, by the way, has a long history in 
>distributed computing.

Yep.

Mike 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openfabrics.org/pipermail/general/attachments/20051110/590e5495/attachment.html>