> Are you referring to the unified driver stuff?  I can take a look.  
> Justpoint me in the direction of what new API 
> calls/options/whatever aren't working.

Or if you have a sample piece of test code, taht'd be even better.

Al


--
Albert Chu
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory

----- Original Message -----
From: Albert Chu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Thursday, November 3, 2005 6:04 pm
Subject: Re: [Freeipmi-devel] ipmi 2.0 branch

> > I am thinking if you should start IPMI-2.0 work in the current 
> branch> itself. We can always say 2.0 support as experimental. 
> Otherwise you
> > will still have to go thru the pain of merging at some point.
> 
> I think I'll keep it in a branch.  I guess it's development philosophy
> differences.  I'm not a big fan of dumping very new untested
> experimental code into a soon to be new release.  Remember, I release
> this code into our production environment :-)
> 
> > I should have made a test release 2 weeks ago. But Bala got struck
> > with the new LAN stack as he is developing on a remote system. It 
> has> a bug. It seems to lock the BMC for auth-types other than
> > AUTH_TYPE_NONE and the system needs physical power-cycle 
> (removing the
> > power chord). Can you continue his work and see what went wrong 
> in the
> > new code. 
> 
> Are you referring to the unified driver stuff?  I can take a look.  
> Justpoint me in the direction of what new API 
> calls/options/whatever aren't
> working.
> 
> Al
> 
> --
> Albert Chu
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Anand Babu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: Thursday, November 3, 2005 6:50 pm
> Subject: Re: [Freeipmi-devel] ipmi 2.0 branch
> 
> > ,----[ Albert Chu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ]
> > | Ab, Bala, etc.,
> > | I'm starting some development in the branch 'al_ipmi_2_0_branch'.
> > `----
> > I am thinking if you should start IPMI-2.0 work in the current 
> branch> itself. We can always say 2.0 support as experimental. 
> Otherwise you
> > will still have to go thru the pain of merging at some point.
> > 
> > I should have made a test release 2 weeks ago. But Bala got struck
> > with the new LAN stack as he is developing on a remote system. It 
> has> a bug. It seems to lock the BMC for auth-types other than
> > AUTH_TYPE_NONE and the system needs physical power-cycle 
> (removing the
> > power chord). Can you continue his work and see what went wrong 
> in the
> > new code. 
> > 
> > I suspect it has to do with session and session-auth header. 
> > 
> > After you fix this bug, I want add support for
> > per-message-auth-disable. This means if lan-channel-auth-caps 
> reports> per-message-auth as disabled, then session-auth will be 
> used only
> > during session initiation. Bala will take care of this. Immediately
> > after finishing this we will make a test release.
> > 
> > I am still travelling and should be back on 11th. 
> > 
> > -- 
> > Anand Babu 
> > GPG Key ID: 0x62E15A31
> > Blog [http://ab.freeshell.org]              
> > The GNU Operating System [http://www.gnu.org]  
> > 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Freeipmi-devel mailing list
> Freeipmi-devel@gnu.org
> http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/freeipmi-devel
> 



_______________________________________________
Freeipmi-devel mailing list
Freeipmi-devel@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/freeipmi-devel

Reply via email to