> Don't get me wrong, I think your patch is ultimately the right way to > go, but it needs another part to address the problem IPv6 has - or at > least a plan on how to address it. I don't think ignoring > the synchronizing problem is the way to go.
OK, I think I've convinced myself that the gain from this patch is worth the small risk of addr autoconf breakage. So I'll apply it for now. > Also, in my view, the problem you are seeing with MLID exhaustion is > purely a SM problem and has nothing to do with IPoIB and switch > limits. SMs need to treat MLIDs as a precious resource and share them > agressively. Especially IPv6 solicited node multicast addresses. Agree -- this patch is definitely a workaround for broken fabrics -- but most (all?) current SMs don't deal with MLID allocation correctly. - R. _______________________________________________ general mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openfabrics.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/general To unsubscribe, please visit http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general
