<!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: [dat-discussions] RE: [openib-general] IB Address Translation service</TITLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY>
<BR>
<BR>
<P><FONT SIZE=2>From: Kanevsky, Arkady [<A HREF="mailto:arkady@netapp.com">mailto:arkady@netapp.com</A>] </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>Sent: Wednesday, March 02, 2005 1:44 PM</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> Some historical perspective - ATS was defined prior to IPoIB.</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> The requirements.</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> DAT has two needs:</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> 1. forward translation: given an IP address returns back IB </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> GID/LID. 2. reverse translation: given IB GID/LID returns </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> back an IP address of the requestor.</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> ULPs: NFS, DAFS.</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> SDP encoded IP addresses into its headers.</FONT>
</P>
<P><FONT SIZE=2>Arkady, you meant that SDP placed the IP addresses into the private data </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>of the CM REQ message. This message just go once when the connection</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>is established. Right ?</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>In other words, if one wants to perform reverse lookup when not using ATS,</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>then the private data of the REQ message in DAPL has to change so that</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>the connecting node can send it's IP address.</FONT>
</P>
<P><FONT SIZE=2>> But DAT is API and cannot define a protocol for it.</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> Abstract address translation is a good idea.</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> For IB we can use ATS or IPoIB.</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> For iWARP it will be no-op.</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> We must ensure that the DAPL that we submit to Linux can be </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> layered on top of all RDMA transports.</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> Since IPoIB had not had plugfest/connectathon or some other </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> interop that demonstrate ARP and RARP I suggest we have both </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> ATS and IPoIB support. ATS has been fully successfully tested </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> at DAPL Plugfest.</FONT>
</P>
<P><FONT SIZE=2>As far as I know IPoIB has been tested for interop to some degree </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>last plugfest. I don't know the details. Note that it was tested as a </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>standalone module and not as an address resolution mechanism </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>for DAPL.</FONT>
</P>
<P><FONT SIZE=2>> </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> In DAPL we had not assessed the HA requirements implications </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> on address translations which is currently under discussion.</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> Arkady Kanevsky email: arkady@netapp.com</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> Network Appliance phone: 781-768-5395</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> 375 Totten Pond Rd. Fax: 781-895-1195</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> Waltham, MA 02451-2010 central phone: 781-768-5300</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> > -----Original Message-----</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> > From: Tom Duffy [<A HREF="mailto:tduffy@sun.com">mailto:tduffy@sun.com</A>]</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> > Sent: Tuesday, March 01, 2005 6:02 PM</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> > To: Yaron Haviv</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> > Cc: openib-general@openib.org</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> > Subject: RE: [openib-general] IB Address Translation service</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> > </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> > </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> > [ putting back on list ]</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> > </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> > On Wed, 2005-03-02 at 00:29 +0200, Yaron Haviv wrote:</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> > > Did you try RARP with IPoIB ?</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> > </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> > I have not.</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> > </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> > > I thought that there is some issue that it doesn't work</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> > </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> > Currently, the rarpd only works with ethernet, but I don't</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> > see why this couldn't be fixed.</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> > </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> > > Also I hope you can comment on the other ib_at capabilities</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> > which are</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> > > more important than ATS</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> > </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> > I don't mind the idea of abstracting out address translation.</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> > I think maybe this is a premature optimization and we should </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> > see how each ULP uses/does it first, then abstract out common </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> > code. Otherwise, I feel neither strongly for or against your </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> > proposal.</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> > </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> > -tduffy</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> > </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> Yahoo! Groups Sponsor</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> ADVERTISEMENT</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> Yahoo! Groups Links</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> To visit your group on the web, go to: </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> <A HREF="http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dat-discussions/" TARGET="_blank">http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dat-discussions/</A></FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> To </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> dat-discussions-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> </FONT>
</P>
</BODY>
</HTML>