Jim, I have two questions for you. 1] can you post a diff of changes? 2] Is there any plan to document(= real use example?) this "feature" or how it works? Also, perhaps document change in behaviour as well? Perhaps, it's done already. This feature is already documented, I mean, not the changes.
Thanks, Z. On Tue, Feb 26, 2013 at 10:58 PM, Jim Mankovich <jm...@hp.com> wrote: > All, > If anyone has an objection to my proposed change to have -m <local_address> > be all that is > necessary to modify the local IPMB address, let me know by the end of the > week. > > With the code as currently written, you have to specify both -m > <local_address> and > -t <target_address> with both local_address and target_address set to the > exact same IPMB > address to actually accomplish setting only the local IPMB address. > > Thanks, > Jim > > -- Jim Mankovich | jm...@hp.com -- > > On 2/20/2013 7:41 AM, Jim Mankovich wrote: >> Corey, >> >> When you specify -m 0x54 and -t 0x54 on the ipmitool command line, the >> message will >> be correctly routed to the local MC. But, if you only specify -m 0x54, >> the message will >> be bridged to 0x20 from 0x54 because the default target address in the >> OpenIPMI interface >> in ipmptool is set to a default of 0x20 instead of zero. This bridging to >> 0x20 from 0x54 >> when you only specify -m 0x54 on the command line has caused confusion for >> more than >> one person. >> >> -- Jim Mankovich | jm...@hp.com -- >> >> On 2/19/2013 5:59 PM, Corey Minyard wrote: >>> So you are saying that if you set the local address to, say -m 0x54, and >>> then send a messages with -t 0x54, it will not route it to the local MC, >>> and the message just gets lost? That may be the case, I'm not that >>> familiar with ipmitool. One would expect that would work properly, but >>> the driver does not catch this (perhaps it should) and perhaps ipmitool >>> doesn't (perhaps it should). The openipmi library does do this. >>> >>> Am I correct? >>> >>> -corey >>> >>> On 02/19/2013 03:43 PM, Jim Mankovich wrote: >>>> All, >>>> >>>> I recently discovered that the in band ipmitool OpenIPMI Interface did now >>>> work as I >>>> expected when I attempted to specify different local IPMB address via the >>>> -m switch. >>>> >>>> My expectation was that local system interface would be used with the >>>> address I >>>> specified on the command line, but instead ipmitool attempted to bridge my >>>> request because >>>> the interface target address was 0x20 and my specified address via -m was >>>> not 0x20. I tracked >>>> the issue down to the fact that bridging will occur in the OpenIPMI >>>> interface whenever there >>>> is a non zero target address and the target address is not equal to the >>>> interface address. I >>>> believe this logic is reasonable, but I think the intent was that the >>>> target address would always >>>> be zero unless it was specified on the command line with the -t option (in >>>> which case you want >>>> bridging). The problem I am seeing crops up because the OpenIPMI >>>> interface in ipmitool initializes >>>> both the target address and the interface address to 0x20 instead of only >>>> initializing the interface >>>> address to 0x20 and setting the target address to zero. Does anyone >>>> happen to know whether my >>>> interpretation of intended usages for -m and -t are correct? >>>> >>>> Thanks in Advance, >>>> Jim >>>> >>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>> Everyone hates slow websites. So do we. >>> Make your web apps faster with AppDynamics >>> Download AppDynamics Lite for free today: >>> http://p.sf.net/sfu/appdyn_d2d_feb >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Ipmitool-devel mailing list >>> Ipmitool-devel@lists.sourceforge.net >>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ipmitool-devel >>> >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> Everyone hates slow websites. So do we. >> Make your web apps faster with AppDynamics >> Download AppDynamics Lite for free today: >> http://p.sf.net/sfu/appdyn_d2d_feb >> _______________________________________________ >> Ipmitool-devel mailing list >> Ipmitool-devel@lists.sourceforge.net >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ipmitool-devel >> > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Everyone hates slow websites. So do we. > Make your web apps faster with AppDynamics > Download AppDynamics Lite for free today: > http://p.sf.net/sfu/appdyn_d2d_feb > _______________________________________________ > Ipmitool-devel mailing list > Ipmitool-devel@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ipmitool-devel ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Everyone hates slow websites. So do we. Make your web apps faster with AppDynamics Download AppDynamics Lite for free today: http://p.sf.net/sfu/appdyn_d2d_feb _______________________________________________ Ipmitool-devel mailing list Ipmitool-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ipmitool-devel
