[openib-general] RE: [dat-discussions] round 2 - proposal for socket based connection model

[Sean Hefty]

Kanevsky, Arkady wrote:
> Think of a single API that supports iWARP and IB (transport independent
> API).

The CMA implements this today and did not require any changes to the IB CM.

> To a connection listener it provides the IP 5-tuple + private data.
> For IB it means that CM parses REQ and extracts IP 5-tuple as separate
> fields from private data.

Why push this down into the CM?  The CM should operate on IB addresses, not IP 
addresses.  The mapping of IP addresses to IB addresses is done at a higher level.

> Listener does not parse the private data encoding of the proposal.

The listener is the one who cares about the IP addressing.

- Sean