[swg] RE: [openib-general] socket based connectionmodel for IB proposal -round 4

[Sean Hefty]

Ted H. Kim wrote:
> I know we originally set out to compress everything down to
> the minimum to preserve as much ULP specific private data as
> possible. But it seems to me in the current proposal we have
> reserved space now which could be used to re-expand the
> version to major 4-bits and minor-4 bits without harming
> anything else.

I don't see any benefit to having 2 4-bit version numbers over a single 8-bit 
number.  A single 4-bit version number should suffice.  If all version numbers 
are ever consumed, then version 15 can define an extended version field.  IMO, 
multiple version fields simply complicate the implementation.

I would rather see the reserved space used to define the size of carried 
user-private data.

- Sean