[ofa-general] RE: [ewg] [PATCH 0/9] RDMAoE - RDMA over Ethernet-- some procedural questions

[Roland Dreier]

 > > I think that in any case, OFA needs to have a consistent policy, and
 > > if we allow something that is not a standard for one member, it
 > > should be allowed for all members.

 > Agreed; I think that this is my central point -- thanks for saying it
 > succinctly!  Regardless of whether OF "asked" Oracle to submit RDS or
 > not, it's not associated with any standard (I'm not picking on RDS;
 > I'm picking on the OF rules and selectively applying them).
 > Therefore, either the bylaws are wrong of OF/EWG is wrong.

The bylaw in question seems pretty silly given the lack of control or
involvement that OFA has with Linux kernel development.  Given that RDS
is not standardized at the API or wire level and given that RDS is
included in the Linux kernel, what options does the OFA have for
enforcing its bylaws?  Removing RDS from OFED?  Once OFED has *fewer*
features than the standard kernel it becomes pretty pointless; maybe the
logical conclusion is that OFA should get out of the distribution
business (my feelings about ending OFED are well-known I think).

The same applies to IBoE; if (and that really is "if" since I don't
think a conclusion about merging IBoE support into the kernel has been
reached) IBoE goes into the kernel but OFED can't or won't distribute
it, then the relevance of OFED becomes marginal.

 - R.