>This approach would affect all ULPs, however. For example, no SDP imlementation >that I know of retries after a REJ - so this approach won't be interoperable. >And AFAIK SDP spec already interprets reject as connection refused. >There's no provision I cansee in SDP spec for retries on specific >reject code.
How did SDP expect to handle backlog then? Or was that a consideration? >Yes, that was my thinking. To avoid touching all users, maybe the simplest way >is to make ib_cm discard the new cm_id without reject if the client callback >returned -ENOMEM? > >If you consider that in out of memory situation sending reject will also likely >fail, this might be a good idea, regardless. > >Sounds good? I'd like to get some other feedback, but this approach sounds reasonable. - Sean _______________________________________________ openib-general mailing list [email protected] http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general To unsubscribe, please visit http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general
