On Fri, 2008-10-24 at 18:02 +0000, Khan, Shuah wrote: > Pierre, > > Yes. I misstated when I said it doesn't handle 5.0. What I meant to say > is that the plug-in doesn't have the case for AMC modules. Is it okay to > have the plug-in talk to AMC based on the site address communicated to > it by the Carrier IPMC. The case I am dealing with is the IPMC on the > AMC carrier bridges traffic and communicates AMC module site addresses > as defined in 3.13.1. > > So the question is is it okay to add AMC case to cIpmiMc::CheckTca()? > > Sorry if I am not following what you are saying?
Pierre, Anton, This is a good discussion, however I am not clear if there are any problems adding this enhancement or not. Could you please let me know. -- Shuah ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/ _______________________________________________ Openhpi-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/openhpi-devel
