[openib-general] IB CM and the case of the lost RTU: was a bunch of other topics...

[Sean Hefty]

Or Gerlitz wrote:
> Indeed, lets see if we can get some input from the ULP people working on 
> passive side / targets (eg NFS/Lustre/iSER/SDP).

To recap (since it's been a couple of weeks), we have two general solutions for 
how to support the passive/server/target side of a connection:

1. One method requires that the passive side queue send WRs until they get a 
connection establish event.

2. An alternative allows sending immediately after receiving a response, but may 
require the user to manually transition the connection to established.  Failure 
to do so will cause the connection to tear down if the RTU is never received 
(even after retries).

Without target developer input, I'm guessing at the right solution.  But my 
expectation is that it is likely that the passive side will process receive 
completions before the connection is established, but highly unlikely that the 
RTU will never be received in this case.

- Sean