[ofa-general] Re: [RFC] OpenSM and IPv6 Scalability Proposal

[Eli Dorfman (Voltaire)]

Hal Rosenstock wrote:
> On Sat, May 9, 2009 at 7:31 AM, Eli Dorfman <dorfman.eli at gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Sat, May 9, 2009 at 1:41 PM, Hal Rosenstock <hal.rosenstock at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Sat, May 9, 2009 at 6:32 AM, Eli Dorfman <dorfman.eli at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> On Fri, May 8, 2009 at 4:57 PM, Hal Rosenstock <hal.rosenstock at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> On Wed, May 6, 2009 at 6:24 AM, Slava Strebkov <slavas at voltaire.com> wrote:
>>>>>> In addition to the original proposal we suggest allocating special MLID
>>>>>> for the following MGIDs:
>>>>>>  1. FF12401bxxxx000000000000FFFFFFFF - All Nodes
>>>>>>  2. FF12401bxxxx00000000000000000001 - All hosts
>>>>>>  3. FF12401bffff0000000000000000004d  - all Gateways
>>>>>>  4. FF12401bxxxx00000000000000000002 - all routers
>>>>>>  5. FF12601bABCD000000000001ffxxxxxx - IPv6 SNM
>>>>> It turns out that collapsing multicast groups across PKeys on a single
>>>>> MLID may not be such a good idea unless partition enforcement
>>>>> enforcement by switches is disabled. There should be different modes
>>>>> of collapsing based on this based on whether this is enabled or not.
>>>> The idea is to allocate a different MLID per each of the above special MGIDs.
>>> So one MLID per PKey in the MGID ?
>> yes
>>
>>> What's the difference between xxxx's and ABCD in the syntax above ?
>> none. should be the same.
> 
> Doesn't the xxxxxx for IPv6 mean mask these nibbles though ?

For IPv6 the ABCD is the pkey and xxxxxx is the mask
To make it the same as IPv4 groups we can use the following notation (mmmmmm=mask and xxxx=pkey)
FF12601bxxxx000000000001ffmmmmmm