Fwd: Re: [openib-general] static LID computation withTS_HOST_DRIVER

[Yaron Haviv]

I agree with Dave that Static LID is problematic and we should think of
other short and longer term alternative for that 
(There are many cases where the SM may dictate a non random LID
allocation policy, E.g. LMC configuration changes, Subnet Merge, .. and
the HCA is not aware of it).

I believe that the need for it comes from applications that want to talk
to some kind of a loop back adapter without depending on the port state
or even before the port is up.

A better solution that IBTA needs to look at is creating a well known
Loopback LID value that apps use when they want to talk locally (like IP
127...)

It may even be feasible to implement something on the existing HCA HW
(by using one of the unused multicast LID's and some firmware changes)

Yaron

> -----Original Message-----
> From: openib-general-bounces at openib.org [mailto:openib-general-
> bounces at openib.org] On Behalf Of Roland Dreier
> Sent: Wednesday, September 29, 2004 5:24 PM
> To: David M. Brean
> Cc: openib-general at openib.org
> Subject: Re: Fwd: Re: [openib-general] static LID computation
> withTS_HOST_DRIVER
> 
>     David> Ok.  How does the port inform the SM that it has a
>     David> "preferred" LID?
> 
> The port will already have a LID assigned when the SM discovers it.
> My understanding is that the SM is "encouraged" to preserve a port's
> LID if it doesn't conflict with any other LIDs, and this is what we're
> relying on.
> 
>  - Roland
> _______________________________________________
> openib-general mailing list
> openib-general at openib.org
> http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general
> 
> To unsubscribe, please visit
http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-
> general