[ofa-general] Re: on the coexistance of uDAPLs

[Kanevsky, Arkady]

Karl,
The signatures differences I mentioned are API changes for some
functions,
like dapl_lmr_create, and dapl_rmr_bind.
Thanks,

Arkady Kanevsky                       email: arkady at netapp.com
Network Appliance Inc.               phone: 781-768-5395
1601 Trapelo Rd. - Suite 16.        Fax: 781-895-1195
Waltham, MA 02451                   central phone: 781-768-5300
 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Karl Feind [mailto:kaf at sgi.com] 
> Sent: Monday, April 30, 2007 10:50 AM
> To: Kanevsky, Arkady
> Cc: Arlin Davis; Karl Feind; Brian Forbes; Edward 
> Mascarenhas; Jeff Hanson; general at lists.openfabrics.org
> Subject: Re: [ofa-general] Re: on the coexistance of uDAPLs
> 
> 
> I don't think I understand what the "signature differences" are.
> My feeling is that libdat and the DAPL infrastructure should 
> be as independent of the individual DAPL layers as possible.  
> If some DAPL layers with protocol version 1.2 are installed 
> on the same system as other DAPL layers with protocol 2.0, 
> the best case would be for the DAPL infrastructure (libdat 
> and /etc/dat.conf) to allow this.
> 
> Karl Feind
> SGI
> 
> On Mon, Apr 23, 2007 at 01:59:07PM -0400, Kanevsky, Arkady wrote:
> > There are some signature differences between versions.
> > Since redirection exposes signatures it is not trivial for a single 
> > redirection to support different signatures.
> > Is this really needed?
> > Thanks,
> > 
> > Arkady Kanevsky                       email: arkady at netapp.com
> > Network Appliance Inc.               phone: 781-768-5395
> > 1601 Trapelo Rd. - Suite 16.        Fax: 781-895-1195
> > Waltham, MA 02451                   central phone: 781-768-5300
> >  
> > 
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Arlin Davis [mailto:ardavis at ichips.intel.com]
> > > Sent: Monday, April 16, 2007 3:37 PM
> > > To: Karl Feind
> > > Cc: Brian Forbes; Edward Mascarenhas; Jeff Hanson; 
> > > general at lists.openfabrics.org
> > > Subject: [ofa-general] Re: on the coexistance of uDAPLs
> > > 
> > > Karl Feind wrote:
> > > 
> > > >>comments? other suggestions?
> > > >>
> > > >>-arlin
> > > >>    
> > > >>
> > > >
> > > >I'd really like to see a separate RPM (called something like
> > > >dapl-infra) that installs:
> > > >
> > > >	1) /etc/dat.conf  (empty)
> > > >	2) a script that addes a provider to /etc/data.conf
> > > >	3) a script that removes a provider from /etc/data.conf
> > > >	4) libdat.so
> > > >
> > > >Any DAPL layer depends on this RPM, and invokes the scripts
> > > (2) and (3)
> > > >in the preinstall and postuninstall setep.
> > > >
> > > >This decouples the DAPL infrastructure from the DAPL 
> instantiations.
> > > >
> > > >Just an idea.
> > > >  
> > > >
> > > 
> > > Do you see the need for different versions to co-exist (1.1, 1.2, 
> > > 2.0)?
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > general mailing list
> > > general at lists.openfabrics.org
> > > http://lists.openfabrics.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/general
> > > 
> > > To unsubscribe, please visit
> > > http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general
> > > 
>