[openib-general] IB routing discussion summary

[Sean Hefty]

> Is this first an IBTA problem to solve if you believe there is a problem?

Based on my interpretation, I do not believe that there's an error in the 
architecture.  It seems consistent.  Additional clarification of what PathRecord 
fields mean when the GIDs are on different subnets may be needed, and a change 
to the architecture may make things easier to implement, but that's a separate 
matter.

> I contend CM does not require anything that is subnet local other than to
> target a given router port which should be derived from local SM/SA only 

Then please state how the passive side obtains the information (e.g. SLID/DLID) 
it needs in order to configure its QP.  I claim that information is carried in 
the CM REQ.

The alternatives that I see are:

1. The passive side extracts the data from the LRH that carries the CM REQ.
2. The passive side issues its own local path record query.

Will you please clarify where this information comes from?

> I will further state that SA-SA communication sans perhaps a
> P_Key / Q_Key service lookup should be avoided wherever possible.

I agree - which is why my proposal avoided SA-SA communication.  I see nothing 
in the architecture that prohibits a node from querying an SA that is not on its 
local subnet.

- Sean