[ofa-general] Re: on the coexistance of uDAPLs

[Kanevsky, Arkady]

There are some signature differences between versions.
Since redirection exposes signatures it is not trivial 
for a single redirection to support different signatures.
Is this really needed?
Thanks,

Arkady Kanevsky                       email: arkady at netapp.com
Network Appliance Inc.               phone: 781-768-5395
1601 Trapelo Rd. - Suite 16.        Fax: 781-895-1195
Waltham, MA 02451                   central phone: 781-768-5300
 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Arlin Davis [mailto:ardavis at ichips.intel.com] 
> Sent: Monday, April 16, 2007 3:37 PM
> To: Karl Feind
> Cc: Brian Forbes; Edward Mascarenhas; Jeff Hanson; 
> general at lists.openfabrics.org
> Subject: [ofa-general] Re: on the coexistance of uDAPLs
> 
> Karl Feind wrote:
> 
> >>comments? other suggestions?
> >>
> >>-arlin
> >>    
> >>
> >
> >I'd really like to see a separate RPM (called something like 
> >dapl-infra) that installs:
> >
> >	1) /etc/dat.conf  (empty)
> >	2) a script that addes a provider to /etc/data.conf
> >	3) a script that removes a provider from /etc/data.conf
> >	4) libdat.so
> >
> >Any DAPL layer depends on this RPM, and invokes the scripts 
> (2) and (3) 
> >in the preinstall and postuninstall setep.
> >
> >This decouples the DAPL infrastructure from the DAPL instantiations.
> >
> >Just an idea.
> >  
> >
> 
> Do you see the need for different versions to co-exist (1.1, 
> 1.2, 2.0)?
> _______________________________________________
> general mailing list
> general at lists.openfabrics.org
> http://lists.openfabrics.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/general
> 
> To unsubscribe, please visit 
> http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general
>