[openib-general] RE: [dat-discussions] socket based connection model for IB proposal - round 3

[Caitlin Bestler]

openib-general-bounces at openib.org wrote:
> If you want to maximize consumer usable private data, then
> you can move the version, IP version, protocol, source and
> destination ports into the service ID.
> 
> Separately, if there's any defined mapping to a service ID or
> set of service IDs, then the service ID indicates the format
> of the private data.  No additional information is needed in
> the CM REQ, such as using a reserve bit.
> 

Current CM software could generate the Serive ID. Therefore
the fact that the Private Data is in the "new format" cannot
be part of the Service ID. Otherwise I agree with your analysis
that data can be moved to the Serivce ID. Which is more valuable,
4 more bytes of private data or a very larger number of Service
IDS, is another topic.

> To be clear, the CM REQ _carries_ the IP address.  There
> should be no requirement that the CM performs the mapping,
> and I see no reason why it should even care.
>

The CM needs to have at least the capability of validating
the local IP address supplied.