On Thu, 2008-05-29 at 14:35 -0700, Ira Weiny wrote: > On Thu, 29 May 2008 12:27:12 -0700 > Hal Rosenstock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Ira, > > > > In osm_sa_mcmember_record.c:__search_mgrp_by_mgid, there is: > > > > #define PREFIX_MASK (0xff12601b00000000ULL) > > > > Shouldn't all scopes be consolidated so this should be: > > > > #define PREFIX_MASK (0xff10601b00000000ULL) > > > > or was this intentional for some reason ? > > > > It seemed reasonable for this to consolidate link-local only
Actually, the code doesn't quite even do that. Patch to follow in a bit. -- Hal > because according > to my IPv6 book, solicited node multicast is the particular range, > ff02::1:ff00:0/104 > > However, I am a bit confused about how the scope bits map from the IP address > to the MGID. The MGID refers only to the IB-subnet scope _not_ IP, therefore > what I said above might not matter because we are now talking about the IB > scope. > > But that begs the question: Can a node issue an SNM request to a node in > another IB subnet? (I think the answer is yes if the IP subnet spans more > than > one IB subnet) In that case, the SNM address would be in the range > ff02::1:ff00:0/104 but what MGID would that map onto in IB? I think the > current mapping results in an IB link-local scope. So would a router have to > forward it even though the IB scope is link-local? > > Now my head hurts... :-( > > Ira > _______________________________________________ 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
