On Fri, 2008-05-23 at 13:25 +0300, Sasha Khapyorsky wrote: > On 15:47 Thu 22 May , Ira Weiny wrote: > > I guess my question is "does saquery need this to talk to the SA?" > > > > I am assuming the answer is "yes". > > > > I noticed this in the spec section 14.4.7 page 890: > > > > "The SM Key used for SM authentication is independent of the SM Key in > > the > > SA header used for SA authentication." > > > > Does this mean there could be 2 SM_Key values in use? > > At least I see nothing in the spec against this.
Right; it is more a use case/compromise of trust issue and the implications of that. -- Hal > Also there is stated > explicitly that validity for non-zero values is vendor-defined. > > 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
