[ofiwg] Draft proposal for the SC15 libfabric BoF

[Ryan, Jim]

Gilad and Paul and Bernard, I strongly support this position. We have a duly chartered WG doing the work the Board has approved. They're doing their work to the benefit of the OFA and not at the expense of any other WG. 

I'm dismayed to see this discussion going on after all this time

Jim

-----Original Message-----
From: mwg-bounces at lists.openfabrics.org [mailto:mwg-bounces at lists.openfabrics.org] On Behalf Of Paul Grun
Sent: Tuesday, August 11, 2015 9:35 AM
To: Bernard Metzler
Cc: OFA Marketing Working Group (mwg at lists.openfabrics.org); ofiwg at lists.openfabrics.org
Subject: Re: [mwg] [ofiwg] Draft proposal for the SC15 libfabric BoF

This is a good suggestion.  

Nobody, to my knowledge, has suggested that verbs should not be extended.  But the decision to extend verbs is entirely independent of the work being done in OFI (including DS/DA).

We've had this discussion a number of times, harkening back to the origins of OFI in 2013.  There have been several presentations given on extending verbs, which resulted in the creation of OFV WG.  There is widespread consensus that the OFA should continue to support and develop verbs.

Nevertheless, the conclusion has remained throughout that there is demand for an API at a higher level abstraction than verbs.

Let's be clear once again:  The OFI effort is NOT about killing verbs; it is about expanding the OFA's portfolio.

-Paul

-----Original Message-----
From: Bernard Metzler [mailto:BMT at zurich.ibm.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, August 11, 2015 9:15 AM
To: Paul Grun
Cc: OFA Marketing Working Group (mwg at lists.openfabrics.org); ofiwg at lists.openfabrics.org; Gilad Shainer
Subject: RE: [ofiwg] Draft proposal for the SC15 libfabric BoF

So, the caption of that slide is probably misleading. ibverbs as an interface is in fact being extended in the OFV WG. I suggest not to do a comparative discussion with ibverbs here at all, but lay out the facts the group thinks matter to make kfabrics a good fit.

Caption: kfabrics benefits.

o transport neutral
o minimal requirements on endpoint resources o no heavyweight connection mechanism for local NVM access


Thanks,
Bernard.


From:	Paul Grun <grun at cray.com>
To:	Bernard Metzler <BMT at zurich.ibm.com>, Gilad Shainer
            <Shainer at Mellanox.com>
Cc:	"ofiwg at lists.openfabrics.org" <ofiwg at lists.openfabrics.org>,
            "OFA Marketing Working Group (mwg at lists.openfabrics.org)"
            <mwg at lists.openfabrics.org>
Date:	08/11/2015 05:53 PM
Subject:	RE: [ofiwg] Draft proposal for the SC15 libfabric BoF



I, too, agree.  The comments about verbs in the BoF proposal are based on this slide, currently being developed by DS/DA:

(Embedded image moved to file: pic11582.jpg)

OFI WG came to a similar set of conclusions.   I strongly support the work
going on in OFV WG.  OFV WG is not mentioned in the BoF proposal at all.
-Paul

-----Original Message-----
From: Bernard Metzler [mailto:BMT at zurich.ibm.com]
Sent: Tuesday, August 11, 2015 8:41 AM
To: Gilad Shainer
Cc: Paul Grun; ofiwg at lists.openfabrics.org; OFA Marketing Working Group
(mwg at lists.openfabrics.org)
Subject: Re: [ofiwg] Draft proposal for the SC15 libfabric BoF

Gilad, I agree.

We as an alliance comprising multiple working groups should never promote public bashing among those groups. This should not preclude constructive discussion though.

Thanks,
Bernard.



From:   Gilad Shainer <Shainer at Mellanox.com>
To:     Paul Grun <grun at cray.com>, "ofiwg at lists.openfabrics.org"
            <ofiwg at lists.openfabrics.org>
Cc:     "OFA Marketing Working Group \(mwg at lists.openfabrics.org\)"
            <mwg at lists.openfabrics.org>
Date:   08/10/2015 05:24 PM
Subject:        Re: [ofiwg] Draft proposal for the SC15 libfabric BoF
Sent by:        ofiwg-bounces at lists.openfabrics.org



Thanks for sending Paul.

I am not sure I understand why you suggest that the verbs API is not something that fit the needs of applications. The API was created with the RDMA network architecture to meet the needs of applications and it is proven in many systems installations, and it supports both InfiniBand and Ethernet. OFI is yet to be proved on a single system.

As long as OFA supports the development of OFI and OFV, I think that we need to be careful not to have negative view on neither  of them. If you want to focus on OFI that is fine, but there is no need to say it is the better option. The opposite can also be said.

Regards,
Gilad Shainer
Vice President, Marketing
Mellanox Technologies
350 Oakmead Parkway, Suite 100, Sunnyvale CA, 94085
Office: 408-916-0048, Mobile: 408-421-0048, Fax: 408-585-0348

From: mwg-bounces at lists.openfabrics.org [ mailto:mwg-bounces at lists.openfabrics.org] On Behalf Of Paul Grun
Sent: Friday, August 07, 2015 12:22 AM
To: ofiwg at lists.openfabrics.org
Cc: OFA Marketing Working Group (mwg at lists.openfabrics.org)
Subject: [mwg] Draft proposal for the SC15 libfabric BoF

Comments and feedback are encouraged and welcomed.
-Paul

Cray Inc.
Office:    (503) 620-8757
Mobile:  (503) 703-5382
_______________________________________________
ofiwg mailing list
ofiwg at lists.openfabrics.org
http://lists.openfabrics.org/mailman/listinfo/ofiwg


_______________________________________________
mwg mailing list
mwg at lists.openfabrics.org
http://lists.openfabrics.org/mailman/listinfo/mwg

To unsubscribe, please visit http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general