[ofa-general] Re: Re: IPoIB-CM UC mode

[Or Gerlitz]

Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
>> Quoting Sean Hefty <mshefty at ichips.intel.com>:
>> Subject: Re: [ofa-general] Re: Re: IPoIB-CM UC mode
>>
>>> So we must send something that will force remote side to respond. One such
>>> message is LAP with current primary path used as proposed alternate path.
>>> Remote will respond with APR with AP status 5 if the connection is there, 
>>> and
>>> status 1 if it is not.
>> I didn't follow this.  Is this just an out of band keep alive message? 
> 
> Yes. Exactly.

Michael,

You may know that for each neighbour, the Linux network stack sends 
every m jiffies a --unicast-- ARP probe, where after n jiffies there is 
no ARP reply, it sends a broadcast ARP.

The default values are m=30*HZ and n=30*HZ, but you can change them,
its net.ipv4.neigh.default{gc_interval,gc_stale_time}

My understanding it that it solves everything, no need for keep alives

Do I missing anything here?

Or.