[openib-general] IB routing discussion summary
mshefty at ichips.intel.com
Thu Feb 15 14:05:24 PST 2007
> Is this first an IBTA problem to solve if you believe there is a problem?
Based on my interpretation, I do not believe that there's an error in the
architecture. It seems consistent. Additional clarification of what PathRecord
fields mean when the GIDs are on different subnets may be needed, and a change
to the architecture may make things easier to implement, but that's a separate
> I contend CM does not require anything that is subnet local other than to
> target a given router port which should be derived from local SM/SA only
Then please state how the passive side obtains the information (e.g. SLID/DLID)
it needs in order to configure its QP. I claim that information is carried in
the CM REQ.
The alternatives that I see are:
1. The passive side extracts the data from the LRH that carries the CM REQ.
2. The passive side issues its own local path record query.
Will you please clarify where this information comes from?
> I will further state that SA-SA communication sans perhaps a
> P_Key / Q_Key service lookup should be avoided wherever possible.
I agree - which is why my proposal avoided SA-SA communication. I see nothing
in the architecture that prohibits a node from querying an SA that is not on its
More information about the general