[ofa-general] Re: initial set of "direct" SDP tests in netperf

[Rick Jones]

>>I was poking around - it would be nice if they could take AF_INET_SDP - I 
>>have to wonder if IPPROTO_SDP is actually better, but seeing there has been 
>>some discussion there (but not having read all of it) I'm just going to go 
>>with the flow...
> 
> 
> Basically everyone said "it does not matter".
> Do you think IPPROTO_SDP is better?

To the extent that I have no idea what is really happening under the 
covers with SDP I would say yes.

My understanding is that the only difference is that "SDP" is used 
rather than "TCP."  That being the case, then I would think it 
would/should be like using say UDP vs TCP vs SCTP (ignoring the obvoius 
protocol differences).

Each are "INET" sockets using "INET" addressing, the difference is the 
layer-four (transport) protocol being used, which is selected via 
IPPROTO_TCP vs IPPROTO_UDP vs IPPROTO_SCTP.

And when/if IPv6 is supported, then there shouldn't (?) be any need to 
have an "extra" AF_INET6_SDP - one would use AF_INET and AF_INET6 with 
IPPROTO_SDP.

Also, an application making use of getaddrinfo() (as all well-written 
apps are supposed to be these days :) wouldn't have to worry about name 
to IP resolution in the general case (where a protocol is not provided 
with the hints) when wanting to use SDP directly - it still calls 
getaddrinfo() with AF_INET, AF_INET6 or AF_UNSPEC as before, no need to 
worry that AF_INET_SDP is not groked by getaddrinfo().


rick jones
from the SDP/IB peanut gallery