[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > On Thu, 2006-03-16 at 10:45 -0500, James Lentini wrote: >> >> On Thu, 16 Mar 2006, Steve Wise wrote: >> >> swise> Just to clarify: Tom is talking about iWARP devices here that >> swise> support the native stack -and- the rdma stack with the same >> swise> offload device. For IB devices, the above "collision" doesn't >> swise> matter because IB really doesn't use the ip addresses at all >> swise> after the RC is setup. AND, the native stack TCP support in >> IB swise> (IPoIB) uses a different QP and service type (UD). > So there's no problem with said collision. >> >> If there is a fix for the iWARP collision problem, wouldn't there be >> an analogous fix for IB? Why wouldn't we make that fix? > > Perhaps. To be honest, I have followed the SDP/IB side of > this thread enough... I just wanted to make a point that > iwarp devices have a different issue. >
But it really isn't a different issue. If you are representing to the application that you are listening for TCP connections on IP address X port Y then there really shouldn't be another listener allowed for X:Y. Isn't that part of presenting yourself as SOCK_STREAM and claiming to use an IP address? _______________________________________________ openib-general mailing list [email protected] http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general To unsubscribe, please visit http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general
