Sean Hefty wrote:
I guess I view this API slightly differently than being just a transport neutral connection interface. I also see it as a way to connect over IB using IP addresses, which today is only possible if using ib_at. That is, the API could do both.

I don't think this layer should replace ib_at. If you think there are things to be fixed in the ib_at, I suggest we fix them. I do believe that the original purpose of this generic cm was to serve ulps that don't want to be transport oriented (e.g. iSER).

Guy

_______________________________________________
openib-general mailing list
[email protected]
http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general

To unsubscribe, please visit http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general

Reply via email to