<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN">
<HTML>
<HEAD>
<META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; charset=us-ascii">
<META NAME="Generator" CONTENT="MS Exchange Server version 5.5.2654.45">
<TITLE>RE: [openib-general] RFC CM peer to peer connections</TITLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY>
<BR>
<BR>
<P><FONT SIZE=2>> From: Libor Michalek [<A HREF="mailto:libor@topspin.com">mailto:libor@topspin.com</A>] </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> Sent: Friday, January 21, 2005 8:27 PM</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> On Thu, Jan 20, 2005 at 02:57:11PM -0800, Sean Hefty wrote:</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> > What priority should peer to peer connection support be in the CM? I</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> > have a general framework in place, but I don't think what's </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> > there will work when connecting in loopback.</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> Since no-one else has answered, I would say low priority. :)</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> -Libor</FONT>
</P>
<P><FONT SIZE=2>I think that ideally IPoIB connected mode should be using peer to peer.</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>Apparently, the RFC draft doesn't support it, because the service ID is</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>derived from the QP number which can be different in each node.</FONT>
</P>
<P><FONT SIZE=2>SDP doesn't support peer to peer, as opposed to TCP. We excluded </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>this mode from SDP spec, because it does not work with CM peer to</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>peer.</FONT>
</P>
<P><FONT SIZE=2>That'll be a long way of saying that there aren't any protocols I know of</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>that will be using peer to peer.</FONT>
</P>
<P><FONT SIZE=2>-Dror</FONT>
</P>
</BODY>
</HTML>