Sasha Khapyorsky wrote:
On 10:48 Mon 15 Oct , Yevgeny Kliteynik wrote:
Switches have the NodeDescription filled by FW, and it's usually the
same string for all the switches.
It must not be same. Also I suppose that node description can be changed
at least for some managed switches even today.
Come on, man...
How many cluster administrators that you know will actually go and set
NodeDescription on switches???
I know at least one asked for this.
I don't want to give user an easy way to make mistakes.
If the user wants to include all the switches in the port group, there's an
easy way to do it just by saying "node-type: SWITCH".
If the user is so advanced that he wants to create port groups with a
specific
switches, it can be done by specifying guids.
The same is true for CAs. So what is your point with "by name"
resolution then?
I'm sure you realize the difference between host names and switch names.
But never mind, forget it.
3. If the admin would like to include num. ranges and asterisks in the
port name, he has to make sure that the NodeDescription is created
like it is created now by openibd.
Again, why this limitation is needed? What is wrong with wildcards like
"myname*", "hostname[1-3] *", etc.?
In the policy file the user specifies *port* names, not *node* names.
Sure, I meant only node's component here. Have it in 'node name' + 'port
number' form. What is easier?
'node_name'/Pn
Where node_name is compared AS IS (including possible white spaces, slashes,
brackets or anything else) to the NodeDescription content, and 'n' is port
number.
In the future I'll think about enhancing the node_name parsing with wild cards.
Looks OK?
-- Yevgeny
Sasha
_______________________________________________
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
