That it's a general IB problem and should be addressed at IB level. Which it seems to be - with CM.
I understand the simplicity that using LAP for an out-of-band keep alive message can give you, but that's not the intent of the message. (You could also use REQ/REJ or SIDR REQ/SIDR REP messages for this carrying the right private data...)
If we don't want to require apps to send in-band keep alive messages, then I think we should explore all potential out-of-band solutions. For example, event registration could be used to detect that a remote node has gone down. We could use per node keep alive messages, rather than per connection messages. We could add a new out-of-band keep alive message. Or clearly define that LAP is the preferred way of for all connections to do keep alives.
- Sean _______________________________________________ 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
