[openib-general] IB Address Translation service

[Michael Krause]

At 11:47 AM 2/28/2005, Yaron Haviv wrote:
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: openib-general-bounces at openib.org [mailto:openib-general-
> > bounces at openib.org] On Behalf Of Paul Baxter
> > Sent: Monday, February 28, 2005 9:32 PM
> > To: openib-general at openib.org
> > Subject: Re: [openib-general] IB Address Translation service
> >
> > Having now just read Yaron's reply, I am even more convinced that this
>is
> > the right way to go albeit I can't comment on the API etc (Could
>someone
> > explain the differences in using ARP and ATS. )
>
>Paul,
>
>ATS (Address Resolution Service) is based on each node registering a
>service record in the SM/SA with GID&P_Key=IP address.
>When you want to map an IP address to IB address it issues an SA query
>to the SM/SA with an IP that results in GID+P_Key values than can be
>used by the ULP.
>
>ATS is a standard defined by DAT and recently also by ICSC.

It is not an ICSC standard.  It is a DAT specification with the ICSC simply 
acting as a proxy for DAT to manage some standard look-up values which it 
can do but I don't recall why DAT cannot.  In any case, the ICSC and DAT 
are different beasts all doing about the same damn thing at the end of the day.


>As I mentioned in the IP to GID API you can specify if to resolve based
>on the IP infrastructure (like the one Libor described), or based on
>ATS, or Default (first try IP/ARP, than ATS).
>
>And as you mentioned there is value to have the same API for different
>resolution mechanisms, the SDP code can be altered in future to ride
>over the proposed API, so it can be used without TCP/IP.

It would be a mistake to attempt to use anything by IP addresses (v4 or v6) 
from an application perspective. Mapping to IB must be application 
transparent to be viable.

Mike 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openfabrics.org/pipermail/general/attachments/20050228/d46c48ce/attachment.html>