> >> 2a. If receive buffers are eventually posted at the target, message > A > >> will be delivered successfully. > >> 2b. If the target endpoint is closed before receive buffers are > >> available at the target for message A, an error is triggered at the > >> sender indicating that message A was not delivered > >> 2c. If message A has not been delivered within a given timeout (for > any > >> reason -- to include lack of buffers at the target), an error is > >> triggered at the sender indicating that message A was not delivered > >> > >> In short: assuming a receiver a) continually posts receive buffers, > and > >> b) doesn't close its endpoint, do senders need to worry about > credits > >> with RDM endpoints? > > > > IMO, the ideal case is option 2. This relates to the resource > management enabled attribute. With RM disabled, option 1 is a valid > way to handle the issue. With RM enabled, I would expect the provider > to implement something closer to option 2. > > I don't quite grok this answer: 2a and 2b could happen together, but I > kinda considered 2c to be a different option (i.e., I specifically > didn't mention timeout in 2a or 2b).
I was assuming that all of your 2_ options were part of a single solution, with 2c indicating that reliability protocols eventually give up _______________________________________________ ofiwg mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openfabrics.org/mailman/listinfo/ofiwg
