Quoting r. Sean Hefty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Subject: IB CM and the case of the lost RTU: was a bunch of other topics... > > Or Gerlitz wrote: > > Indeed, lets see if we can get some input from the ULP people working on > > passive side / targets (eg NFS/Lustre/iSER/SDP). > > To recap (since it's been a couple of weeks), we have two general solutions > for > how to support the passive/server/target side of a connection: > > 1. One method requires that the passive side queue send WRs until they get a > connection establish event. > > 2. An alternative allows sending immediately after receiving a response, but > may > require the user to manually transition the connection to established. > Failure > to do so will cause the connection to tear down if the RTU is never received > (even after retries). > > Without target developer input, I'm guessing at the right solution. But my > expectation is that it is likely that the passive side will process receive > completions before the connection is established, but highly unlikely that > the > RTU will never be received in this case.
I think SDP would simply queue receive WRs and never send any WRs until established event. -- MST _______________________________________________ openib-general mailing list [email protected] http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general To unsubscribe, please visit http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general
